' 'V ' / 


ai5 

D84n 

IS9B 


BV  THE  SAME  AUTHOR. 


The  Greatest  Thing  in  the  World, 

The  address  made  at  Dr.  Moody’s  College 
at  Northfield,  by  Henry  Drummond. 
Leatherette,  gilt  top,  35  cents. 

“Thoughtful  and  powerful,  with  a wealth  of 
illustration.” — Churchman. 

“ It  is  in  Drummond’s  best  vein.” — Christian 
Unioti. 

“A  Brilliant  Essay.” 


JAMES  POTT  & CO.,  Publishers, 

114  Fifth  Ave.,  New  York. 


NATURAL  LAW 


IN  THE 

SPIRITUAL  WORLD 


BY  • 

HENRY  DRUMMOND,  F.R.S.E.;  F.G.E 


NEW  YORK 

JAMES  POTT  & CO.,  PUBLISHERS 
1 14  Fifth  Avenue 

1893 


/arr. 


CONTENTS. 


9A€& 


Preface  » ♦ 

* 

. 

• 

6 

4 

• 

V 

Introduction  , 

1 

Biogenesis 

* 

59 

Degeneration  . 

• 

V 

c 

• 

« 

* 

95 

Growth  . 

• 

« 

• 

• 

• 

I2I 

Death  . • 

• 

« 

I4I 

Mortification  . 

*75 

Eternal  Life  . 

• 

• 

* 

. 

• 

• 

201 

Environment  . 

. 

• 

• 

• 

251 

Conformity  to  Type 

. 

• 

• 

285 

Semi-Parasitism 

• 

i 

9 

• 

t 

♦ 

315 

Parasitism 

• 

• 

« 

• 

339 

Classification 

. 

f 

• 

• 

€ 

PREFACE. 


No  class  of  works  is  received  with  more  suspicion, 
I had  almost  said  derision,  than  those  which  deal 
with  Science  and  Religion.  Science  is  tired  of 
reconciliations  betw'een  two  things  which  never 
should  have  been  contrasted  ; Religion  is  offended 
by  the  patronage  of  an  ally  which  it  professes  not 
to  need  ; and  the  critics  have  rightly  discovered 
that,  in  most  cases  where  Science  is  either  pitted 
against  Religion  or  fused  with  it,  there  is  some 
fatal  misconception  to  begin  with  as  to  the  scope 
and  province  of  either.  But  although  no  initial 
protest,  probably,  will  save  this  work  from  the 
unhappy  reputation  of  its  class,  the  thoughtful 
mind  will  perceive  that  the  fact  of  its  subject- 
matter  being  Law — a property  peculiar  neither  to 
Science  nor  to  Religion — at  once  places  it  on  a 
somewhat  different  footing. 

The  real  problem  I have  set  myself  may  be  sti  ted 


ri 


PREFACE. 


in  a sentence.  Is  there  not  reason  to  believe  that 
many  of  the  Laws  of  the  Spiritual  World,  hitherto 
regarded  as  occupying  an  entirely  separate  province, 
are  simply  the  Laws  of  the  Natural  World  ? Can 
we  identify  the  Natural  Laws,  or  any  one  of  them, 
in  the  Spiritual  sphere } That  vague  lines  every- 
where run  through  the  Spiritual  World  is  already 
beginning  to  be  recognised.  Is  it  possible  to  link 
them  with  those  great  lines  running  through  the 
visible  universe  which  we  call  the  Natural  Laws,  or 
are  they  fundamentally  distinct } In  a word,  Is  the 
Supernatural  natural  or  unnatural  ? 

I may,  perhaps,  be  allowed  to  answer  these 
questions  in  the  form  in  which  they  have  answered 
themselves  to  myself.  And  I must  apologise  at  the 
outset  for  personal  references  which,  but  for  the 
clearness  they  may  lend  to  the  statement,  I would 
surely  avoid. 

It  has  been  my  privilege  for  some  years  to  ad- 
dress regularly  two  very  different  audiences  on  two 
very  different  themes.  On  week  days  I have 
lectured  to  a class  of  students  on  the  Natural 
Sciences,  and  on  Sundays  to  an  audience  consisting 
for  the  most  part  of  working  men  on  subjects  of  a 
moral  and  religious  character.  I cannot  say  that 
this  collocation  ever  appeared  as  a difficulty  to  my- 
self, but  to  certain  of  my  friends  it  vas  more  than 


PREFACE. 


vii 


a problem.  It  was  solved  to  me,  however,  at  first, 
by  what  then  seemed  the  necessities  of  the  case— 
I must  keep  the  two  departments  entirely  by  them- 
selves. They  lay  at  opposite  poles  of  thought ; and 
for  a time  I succeeded  in  keeping  the  Science  and 
the  Religion  shut  off  from  one  another  in  two 
separate  compartments  of  my  mind.  But  gradually 
the  wall  of  partition  showed  symptoms  of  giving 
way.  The  two  fountains  of  knowledge  also  slowly 
began  to  overflow,  and  finally  their  waters  met  and 
mingled.  The  great  change  was  in  the  compartment 
which  held  the  Religion.  It  was  not  that  the  well 
there  was  dried ; still  less  that  the  fermenting 
waters  were  washed  away  by  the  flood  of  Science. 
The  actual  contents  remained  the  same.  But  the 
crystals  of  former  doctrine  were  dissolved ; and 
as  they  precipitated  themselves  once  more  in 
definite  forms,  I observed  that  the  Crystalline 
System^  was  changed.  New  channels  also  for 
outward  expression  opened,  and  some  of  the  old 
closed  up;  and  I found  the  truth  running  out 
to  my  audience  on  the  Sundays  by  the  week- 
day outlets.  In  other  words,  the  subject-matter 
Religion  had  taken  on  the  method  of  expression 
of  Science,  and  I discovered  myself  enunciating 
Spiritual  Law  in  the  exact  terms  of  Biology  and 
Physics. 


viii 


PREFACE. 


Now  this  was  not  simply  a scientific  colouring 
given  to  Religion,  the  mere  freshening  of  the  theo- 
logical air  with  natural  facts  and  illustrations.  It 
was  an  entire  re-casting  of  truth.  And  when  I came 
seriously  to  consider  what  it  involved,  I saw,  or 
seemed  to  see,  that  it  meant  essentially  the  intro- 
duction of  Natural  Law  into  the  Spiritual  World. 
It  was  not,  I repeat,  that  new  and  detailed  analogies 
of  Phenomena  rose  into  view — although  material  for 
Parable  lies  unnoticed  and  unused  on  the  field  of 
recent  Science  in  inexhaustible  profusion.  But 
Law  has  a still  grander  function  to  discharge  towards 
Religion  than  Parable.  There  is  a deeper  unity 
between  the  two  Kingdoms  than  the  analogy  of 
their  Phenomena — a unity  which  the  poet’s  vision, 
more  quick  than  the  theologian’s,  has  already  dimly 
seen : — 

“And  verily  many  thinkers  of  this  age, 

Aye,  many  Christian  teachers,  half  in  heaven, 

Are  wrong  in  just  my  sense,  who  understood 
Our  natural  world  too  insularly,  as  if 
No  spiritual  counterpart  completed  it, 

Consummating  its  meaning,  rounding  all 
To  justice  and  perfection,  line  by  line^ 

Form  by  forfn^  nothing  single  nor  aloncy 
The  great  below  clenched  by  the  great  above**^* 


Aurora  Leigh. 


PREFACE, 


V3 

The  function  of  Parable  in  religion  is  to  exhibit 
form  by  form.”  Law  undertakes  the  profoundei 
task  of  comparing  "line  by  line.”  Thus  Natural 
Phenomena  serve  mainly  an  illustrative  function  in 
Religion.  Natural  Law,  on  the  other  hand,  could  it 
be  traced  in  the  Spiritual  World,  would  have  an 
important  scientific  value — it  would  offer  Religion 
a new  credential.  The  effect  of  the  introduction  of 
Law  among  the  scattered  Phenomena  of  Nature  has 
simply  been  to  make  Science,  to  transform  knowledge 
into  eternal  truth.  The  same  crystallising  touch  is 
needed  in  Religion.  Can  it  be  said  that  the  Pheno- 
mena of  the  Spiritual  World  are  other  than  scat- 
tered ? Can  we  shut  our  eyes  to  the  fact  that  the 
religious  opinions  of  mankind  are  in  a state  of  flux  ? 
And  when  we  regard  the  uncertainty  of  current 
beliefs,  the  war  of  creeds,  the  havoc  of  inevitable  as 
well  as  of  idle  doubt,  the  reluctant  abandonment  of 
early  faith  by  those  who  would  cherish  it  longer  if 
they  could,  is  it  not  plain  that  the  one  thing  thinking 
men  are  waiting  for  is  the  introduction  of  Law 
among  the  Phenomena  of  the  Spiritual  World  ? 
When  that  comes  we  shall  offer  to  such  men  a truly 
scientific  theology.  And  the  Reign  of  Law  will 
transform  the  whole  Spiritual  World  as  it  has  already 
transformed  the  Natural  World. 

I confess  that  even  when  in  the  first  dim  vision, 


PREFACE. 


the  organizing  hand  of  Law  moved  among  the  un- 
ordered truths  of  my  Spiritual  World,  poor  and 
scantily-furnished  as  it  was,  there  seemed  to  come 
over  it  the  beauty  of  a transfiguration.  The  change 
was  as  great  as  from  the  old  chaotic  world  o^ 
Pythagoras  to  the  symmetrical  and  harmonious 
universe  of  Newton.  My  Spiritual  World  before 
was  a chaos  of  facts  ; my  Theology,  a Pythagorean 
system  trying  to  make  the  best  of  Phenomena  apart 
from  the  idea  of  Law.  I make  no  charge  against 
Theology  in  general.  I speak  of  my  own.  And  I 
say  that  I saw  it  to  be  in  many  essential  respects 
centuries  behind  every  department  of  Science  I 
knew.  It  was  the  one  region  still  unpossessed  by 
Law.  I saw  then  why  men  of  Science  distrust 
Theology ; why  those  who  have  learned  to  look 
upon  Law  as  Authority  grow  cold  to  it — it  was  the 
Great  Exception. 

I have  alluded  to  the  genesis  of  the  idea  in  my 
own  mind  partly  for  another  reason — to  show  its 
naturalness.  Certainly  I never  premeditated  any- 
thing to  myself  so  objectionable  and  so  unwarrant- 
able in  itself,  as  either  to  read  Theology  into 
Science  or  Science  into  Theology.  Nothing  could 
be  more  artificial  than  to  attempt  this  on  the 
speculative  side ; and  it  has  been  a substantial  re- 
lief to  me  throughout  that  the  idea  rose  up  thus 


PREFACE, 


E) 

in  the  course  ot  practical  work  and  shaped  itself 
day  by  day  unconsciously.  It  might  be  charged, 
nevertheless,  that  I was  all  the  time,  whether 
consciously  or  unconsciously,  simply  reading  my 
Theology  into  my  Science.  And  as  this  would 
hopelessly  vitiate  the  conclusions  arrived  at,  I must 
acquit  myself  at  least  of  the  intention.  Of  nothing 
have  I been  more  fearful  throughout  than  of  making 
Nature  parallel  with  my  own  or  with  any  creed. 
The  only  legitimate  questions  one  dare  put  to 
Nature  are  those  which  concern  universal  human 
good  and  the  Divine  interpretation  of  things.  These 
I conceive  may  be  there  actually  studied  at  first- 
hand, and  before  their  purity  is  soiled  by  human 
touch.  We  have  Truth  in  Nature  as  it  came  from 
God.  And  it  has  to  be  read  with  the  same  un- 
biassed mind,  the  same  open  eye,  the  same  faith, 
and  .the  same  reverence  as  all  other  Revelation. 
All  that  is  found  there,  whatever  its  place  in  Theo- 
logy,  whatever  its  orthodoxy  or  heterodoxy,  what- 
ever its  narrowness  or  its  breadth,  we  are  bound  to 
accept  as  Doctrine  from  which  on  the  lines  of 
Science  there  is  no  escape. 

When  this  presented  itself  to  me  as  a method,  1 
felt  it  to  be  due  to  it — were  it  only  to  secure,  so  far 
as  that  was  possible,  that  no  former  bias  should  inter- 
fere with  the  integrity  of  the  results — to  begin  again 

b 


PREFACE. 


3Ui 

at  the  beginning  and  reconstruct  my  Spiritual  World 
step  by  step.  The  result  of  that  inquiry,  so  far  as  its 
expression  in  systematic  form  is  concerned,  I have 
not  given  in  this  book.  To  reconstruct  a Spiritual 
Religion,  or  a department  of  Spiritual  Religion--for 
this  is  all  the  method  can  pretend  to — on  the  lines  of 
Nature  would  be  an  attempt  from  which  one  better 
equipped  in  both  directions  might  well  be  pardoned 
if  he  shrank.  My  object  at  present  is  the  humbler 
one  of  venturing  a simple  contribution  to  practical 
Religion  along  the  lines  indicated.  What  Bacon  pre- 
dicates of  the  Natural  World,  Natura  enim  non  nisi 
parendo  vhicitur^  is  also  true,  as  Christ  had  already 
told  us,  of  the  Spiritual  World.  And  I present  a few 
samples  of  the  religious  teaching  referred  to  formerly 
as  having  been  prepared  under  the  influence  of  scien- 
tific ideas  in  the  hope  that  they  may  be  useful  first  of 
all  in  this  direction. 

I would,  however,  carefully  point  out  that  though 
their  unsystematic  arrangement  here  may  create  the 
impression  that  these  papers  are  merely  isolated 
readings  in  Religion  pointed  by  casual  scientific 
truths,  they  are  organically  connected  by  a single 
principle.  Nothing  could  be  more  false  both  to 
Science  and  to  Religion  than  attempts  to  adjust  the 
two  spheres  by  making  out  ingenious  points  of  con- 
tact  in  detail.  The  solution  of  this  great  question  of 


PREFACE. 


xili 


conciliation,  if  one  may  still  refer  to  a problem  so 
gratuitous,  must  be  general  rather  than  particular. 
The  basis  in  a common  principle — the  Continuity  of 
Law — can  alone  save  specific  applications  from  rank- 
ing  as  mere  coincidences,  or  exempt  them  from  the 
reproach  of  being  a hybrid  between  two  things  which 
must  be  related  by  the  deepest  affinities  or  remain 
for  ever  separate. 

To  the  objection  that  even  a basis  in  Law  is  no 
warrant  for  so  great  a trespass  as  the  intrusion  into 
another  field  of  thought  of  the  principles  of  Natural 
Science,  I would  reply  that  in  this  I find  I am 
following  a lead  which  in  other  departments  has  not 
only  been  allowed  but  has  achieved  results  as  rich  as 
they  were  unexpected.  What  is  the  Physical  Politic 
of  Mr.  Walter  Bagehot  but  the  extension  of  Natural 
Law  to  the  Political  World  } What  is  the  Biological 
Sociology  of  Mr.  Herbert  Spencer  but  the  applica- 
tion of  Natural  Law  to  the  Social  World  } Will  it 
be  charged  that  the  splendid  achievements  of  such 
thinkers  are  hybrids  between  things  which  Nature 
has  meant  to  remain  apart  ? Nature  usually  solves 
such  problems  for  herself.  Inappropriate  hybridism 
is  checked  by  the  Law  of  Sterility.  Judged  by  this 
great  Law  these  modern  developments  of  our  know- 
ledge stand  uncondemned.  Within  their  own  sphere 
the  results  of  Mr.  Herbert  Spencer  are  far  from 


PREFACE, 


xiv 

sterile- — the  application  of  Biology  to  Political  Eco- 
nomy is  already  revolutionizing  the  Science.  If  the 
introduction  of  Natural  Law  into  the  Social  sphere 
is  no  violent  contradiction  but  a genuine  and  perma- 
nent contribution,  shall  its  further  extension  to  the 
Spiritual  sphere  be  counted  an  extravagance  ? Does 
not  the  Principle  of  Continuity  demand  its  applica- 
tion in  every  direction  ? To  carry  it  as  a working 
principle  into  so  lofty  a region  may  appear  imprac- 
ticable. Difficulties  lie  on  the  threshold  which  may 
seem,  at  first  sight,  insurmountable.  But  obstacles  to 
a true  method  only  test  its  validity.  And  he  who 
honestly  faces  the  task  may  find  relief  in  feeling  that 
whatever  else  of  crudeness  and  imperfection  mar  it, 
the  attempt  is  at  least  in  harmony  with  the  thought 
and  movement  of  his  time. 

That  these  papers  were  not  designed  to  appear  in 
a collective  form,  or  indeed  to  court  the  more  public 
light  at  all,  needs  no  disclosure.  They  are  published 
out  of  regard  to  the  wish  of  known  and  unknown 
friends  by  whom,  when  in  a fugitive  form,  they  were 
received  with  so  curious  an  interest  as  to  make  one 
feel  already  that  there  are  minds  which  such  forms  of 
truth  may  touch.  In  making  the  present  selection, 
partly  from  manuscript,  and  partly  from  articles 
already  published,  I have  been  guided  less  by  the 
wish  to  constitute  the  papers  a connected  series  than 


PREFACE. 


to  exhibit  the  application  of  the  principle  in  various 
directions.  They  will  be  found,  therefore,  of  unequal 
interest  and  value,  according  to  the  standpoint  from 
which  they  are  regarded.  Thus  some  are  designed 
with  a directly  practical  and  popular  bearing,  others 
being  more  expository,  and  slightly  apologetic  in 
tone.  The  risk  of  combining  two  objects  so  very 
different  is  somewhat  serious.  But,  for  the  reason 
named,  having  taken  this  responsibility,  the  only 
compensation  I can  offer  is  to  indicate  which  of  the 
papers  incline  to  the  one  side  or  to  the  other.  De- 
generation,** Growth,**  ‘'Mortification,**  “ Conformity 
to  Type,**  “ Semi-Parasitism,**  and  “ Parasitism  **  be- 
long to  the  more  practical  order;  and  while  one  or 
two  are  intermediate,  “ Biogenesis,**  “ Death,**  and 
‘‘  Eternal  Life  **  may  be  offered  to  those  who  find  the 
atmosphere  of  the  former  uncongenial  It  will  not 
disguise  itself,  however,  that,  owing  to  the  circum- 
stances in  which  they  were  prepared,  all  the  papers 
are  more  or  less  practical  in  their  aim  ; so  that  to 
the  merely  philosophical  reader  there  is  little  to  be 
offered  except — and  that  only  with  the  greatest 
diffidence — the  Introductory  chapter. 

In  the  Introduction,  which  the  general  reader  may 
do  well  to  ignore,  I have  briefly  stated  the  case  for 
Natural  Law  in  the  Spiritual  World.  The  extension 
01  An  Jogy  to  Laws,  or  rather  the  extension  of  the 


PREFACE. 


KVi 

Laws  themselves,  so  far  as  known  to  me,  is  new ; and 
I cannot  hope  to  have  escaped  the  mistakes  and 
misadventures  of  a first  exploration  in  an  unsurveyed 
land.  So  general  has  been  the  survey  that  1 have 
not  even  paused  to  define  specifically  to  what  de- 
partments of  the  Spiritual  World  exclusively  the 
principle  is  to  be  applied.  The  danger  of  making 
a new  principle  apply  too  widely  inculcates  here  the 
utmost  caution.  One  thing  is  certain,  and  I state  it 
pointedly,  the  application  of  Natural  Law  to  the 
Spiritual  World  has  decided  and  necessary  limits. 
And  if  elsewhere  with  undue  enthusiasm  I seem  to 
magnify  the  principle  at  stake,  the  exaggeration — 
like  the  extreme  amplification  of  the  moon’s  disc 
when  near  the  horizon — must  be  charged  to  that 
almost  necessary  aberration  of  light  which  distorts 
every  new  idea  while  it  is  yet  slowly  climbing  to  its 
zenith. 

In  what  follows  the  Introduction,  except  in  the 
setting,  there  is  nothing  new.  I trust  there  is  nothing 
new.  When  I began  to  follow  out  these  lines,  I had 
no  idea  where  they  would  lead  me.  I was  prepared, 
nevertheless,  at  least  for  the  time,  to  be  loyal  to  the 
method  throughout,  and  share  with  Nature  whatever 
consequences  might  ensue.  But  in  almost  every 
case,  after  stating  what  appeared  to  be  the  truth  in 
words  gathered  directly  from  the  lips  of  Nature,  I 


PREFACE. 


xvii 


was  sooner  or  later  startled  by  a certain  similarity 
in  the  general  idea  to  something  I had  heard  belorc, 
and  this  often  developed  in  a moment,  and  wheri 
I was  least  expecting  it,  into  recognition  of  some 
familiar  article  of  faith.  I was  not  watching  for  this 
result.  I did  not  begin  by  tabulating  the  doctrines, 
as  I did  the  Laws  of  Nature,  and  then  proceed  with 
the  attempt  to  pair  them.  The  majority  of  them 
seemed  at  first  too  far  removed  from  the.  natural 
world  even  to  suggest  this.  Still  less  did  I begin 
with  doctrines  and  work  downwards  to  find  their 
relations  in  the  natural  sphere.  It  was  the  opposite 
process  entirely.  I ran  up  the  Natural  Law  as  far 
as  it  would  go,  and  the  appropriate  doctrine  seldom 
even  loomed  in  sight  till  I had  reached  the  top. 
Then  it  burst  into  view  in  a single  moment. 

I can  scarcely  now  say  whether  in  those  moments 
I was  more  overcome  with  thankfulness  that  Nature 
was  so  like  Revelation,  or  more  filled  with  wonder 
that  Revelation  was  so  like  Nature.  Nature,  it  is 
true,  is  a part  of  Revelation — a much  greater  part 
doubtless  than  is  yet  believed — and  one  could  have 
anticipated  nothing  but  harmony  here.  But  that  a 
derived  Theology,  in  spite  of  the  venerable  verbiage 
which  has  gathered  round  it,  should  be  at  bottom 
and  in  all  cardinal  respects  so  faithful  a transcript 
of  “ the  truth  as  it  is  in  Nature  ” came  as  a surprise 


Rviil 


PREFACE. 


and  to  me  at  least  as  a rebuke.  How,  under  the 
rigid  necessity  of  incorporating  in  its  system  much 
that  seemed  nearly  unintelligible,  and  much  that  was 
barely  credible,  Theology  has  succeeded  so  perfectly 
in  adhering  through  good  report  and  ill  to  what  in 
the  main  are  truly  the  lines  of  Nature,  awakens  a 
new  admiration  for  those  who  constructed  and  kept 
this  faith.  But  however  nobly  it  has  held  its  ground, 
Theology  must  feel  to-day  that  the  modern  world 
calls  for  a further  proof.  Nor  will  the  best  Theology 
resent  this  demand  ; it  also  demands  it.  Theology 
is  searching  on  every  hand  for  another  echo  of  the 
Voice  of  which  Revelation  also  is  the  echo,  that  out 
of  the  mouths  of  two  witnesses  its  truths  should  be 
established.  That  other  echo  can  only  come  from 
Nature.  Hitherto  its  voice  has  been  muffled.  But 
now  that  Science  has  made  the  world  around  articu- 
late, it  speaks  to  Religion  with  a twofold  purpose. 
In  the  first  place  it  offers  to  corroborate  Theology, 
in  the  second  to  purify  it. 

If  the  removal  of  suspicion  from  Theology  is  of 
urgent  moment,  not  less  important  is  the  removal 
of  its  adulterations.  These  suspicions,  many  of  them 
at  least,  are  new ; in  a sense  they  mark  progress. 
But  the  adulterations  are  the  artificial  accumulations 
of  centuries  of  uncontrolled  speculation.  They  are 
the  necessary  result  of  the  old  method  and  the 


PREFACE. 


xis 


warrant  for  its  revision — they  mark  the  impossibility 
of  progress  without  the  guiding  and  restraining  hand 
of  Law.  The  felt  exhaustion  of  the  former  method, 
the  want  of  corroboration  for  the  old  evidence,  the 
protest  of  reason  against  the  monstrous  overgrowths 
which  conceal  the  real  lines  of  truth,  these  summon 
us  to  the  search  for^  a surer  and  more  scientific 
system.  With  truths  of  the  theological  order,  with 
dogmas  which  often  depend  for  their  existence  on  a 
particular  exegesis,  with  propositions  which  rest  for 
their  evidence  upon  a balance  of  probabilities,  or 
upon  the  weight  of  authority  ; with  doctrines  which 
every  age  and  nation  may  make  or  unmake,  which 
each  sect  may  tamper  with,  and  which  even  the 
individual  may  modify  for  himself,  a second  court 
of  appeal  has  become  an  imperative  necessity. 

Science,  therefore,  may  yet  have  to  be  called  upon 
to  arbitrate  at  some  points  between  conflicting 
creeds.  And  while  there  are  some  departments  of 
Theology  where  its  jurisdiction  cannot  be  sought, 
there  are  others  in  which  Nature  may  yet  have 
to  define  the  contents  as  well  as  the  limits  of 
belief 

What  I would  desire  especially  is  a thoughtful 
sonsideration  of  the  method.  The  applications 
ventured  upon  here  may  be  successful  or  unsuc- 
cessful. But  they  would  more  than  satisfy  me  if 


PREFACE. 


they  suggested  a method  to  others  whose  less  clumsy 
hands  might  work  it  out  more  profitably.  For  I am 
convinced  of  the  fertility  of  such  a method  at  the 
present  time.  It  is  recognised  by  all  that  the 
younger  and  abler  minds  of  this  age  find  the  most 
serious  difficulty  in  accepting  or  retaining  the 
ordinary  forms  of  belief.  Especially  is  this  true  of 
those  whose  culture  is  scientific.  And  the  reason 
is  palpable.  No  man  can  study  modern  Science 
without  a change  coming  over  his  view  of  truth 
What  impresses  him  about  Nature  is  its  solidity. 
He  is  there  standing  upon  actual  things,  among  fixed 
laws.  And  the  integrity  of  the  scientific  method  so 
seizes  him  that  all  other  forms  of  truth  begin  to 
appear  comparatively  unstable.  He  did  not  know 
before  that  any  form  of  truth  could  so  hold  him ; 
and  the  immediate  effect  is  to  lessen  his  interest  in 
all  that  stands  on  other  bases.  This  he  feels  in  spite 
of  himself he  struggles  against  it  in  vain ; and  he 
finds  perhaps  to  his  alarm  that  he  is  drifting  fast  into 
what  looks  at  first  like  pure  Positivism.  This  is  an 
inevitable  result  of  the  scientific  training  It  is  quite 
erroneous  to  suppose  that  science  ever  overthrows 
Faith,  if  by  that  is  implied  that  any  natural  truth 
can  oppose  successfully  any  single  spiritual  truth. 
Science  cannot  overthrow  Faith  ; but  it  shakes  it 
Its  own  doctrines,  grounded  in  Nature,  are  so  certain, 


PREFACE, 


ad 


that  the  truths  of  Religion,  resting  to  most  men  on 
Authority,  are  felt  to  be  strangely  insecure.  The 
difficulty,  therefore,  which  men  of  Science  feel  about 
Religion  is  real  and  inevitable,  and  in  so  far  as 
Doubt  is  a conscientious  tribute  to  the  inviolability 
of  Nature  it  is  entitled  to  respect. 

None  but  those  who  have  passed  through  it  can 
appreciate  the  radical  nature  of  the  change  wrought 
by  Science  in  the  whole  mental  attitude  of  its  dis- 
ciples. What  they  really  cry  out  for  in  Religion  is  a 
new  standpoint — a standpoint  like  their  own.  The 
one  hope,  therefore,  for  Science  is  more  Science. 
Again,  to  quote  Bacon — we  shall  hear  enough  from 
the  moderns  by-and-by — “This  I dare  affirm  in 
knowledge  of  Nature,  that  a little  natural  philosophy, 
and  the  first  entrance  into  it,  doth  dispose  the  opinion 
to  atheism ; but,  on  the  other  side,  much  natural 
philosophy,  and  wading  deep  into  it,  will  bring  about 
men’s  minds  to  religion.”  ^ 

The  application  of  similia  similibus  curantur  was 
never  more  in  point  If  this  is  a disease,  it  is  the 
disease  of  Nature,  and  the  cure  is  more  Nature.  For 
what  is  this  disquiet  in  the  breasts  of  men  but  the 
loyal  fear  that  Nature  is  being  violated  ? Men  must 
oppose  with  every  energy  they  possess  what  seems  tc 


Meditationes  Sacrae,®  31. 


PREFACE. 


ijdi 

them  to  oppose  the  eternal  course  of  things.  And 
the  first  step  in  their  deliverance  must  be  not  to 
“reconcile”  Nature  and  Religion,  but  to  exhibit 
Nature  in  Religion.  Even  to  convince  them  that 
there  is  no  controversy  between  Religion  and  Science 
is  insufficient.  A mere  flag  of  truce,  in  the  nature 
of  the  case,  is  here  impossible ; at  least,  it  is  only 
possible  so  long  as  neither  party  is  sincere.  No  man 
who  knows  the  splendour  of  scientific  achievement  or 
cares  for  it,  no  man  who  feels  the  solidity  of  its 
method  or  works  with  it,  can  remain  neutral  with 
regard  to  Religion.  He  must  either  extend  his 
method  into  it,  or,  if  that  is  impossible,  oppose  it  to 
the  knife.  On  the  other  hand,  no-  one  who  knows 
the  content  of  Christianity,  or  feels  the  universal 
need  of  a Religion,  can  stand  idly  by  while  the  in- 
tellect of  his  age  is  slowly  divorcing  itself  from  it. 
What  is  required,  therefore,  to  draw  Science  and  Re- 
ligion together  again — for  they  began  the  centuries 
hand  in  hand — is  the  disclosure  of  the  naturalness  of 
the  supernatural.  Then,  and  not  till  then.,  will  men 
see  how  true  it  is,  that  to  be  loyal  to  all  of  Nature, 
they  must  be  loyal  to  the  part  defined  as  Spiritual. 
No  science  contributes  to  another  without  receiving  a 
reciprocal  benefit.  And  even  as  the  contribution  of 
Science  to  Religion  is  the  vindication  of  the  natural- 
ness of  the  Supernatural,  so  the  gift  of  Religion  to 


PREFACE. 


xxiii 


Science  is  the  demonstration  of  the  supernaturalness 
of  the  Natural.  Thus,  as  the  Supernatural  becomes 
slowly  Natural,  will  also  the  Natural  become  slowly 
Supernatural,  until  in  the  impersonal  authority  of 
Law  men  everywhere  recognise  the  Authority  of 
God. 

To  those  who  already  find  themselves  fully  nour- 
ished on  the  older  forms  of  truth,  I do  not  commend 
these  pages.  They  will  find  them  superfluous.  Nor 
is  there  any  reason  why  they  should  mingle  with 
light  which  is  already  clear  the  distorting  rays  of  a 
foreign  expression 

But  to  those  who  are  feeling  their  way  to  a Chris- 
tian life,  haunted  now  by  a sense  of  instability  in  the 
foundations  of  their  faith,  now  brought  to  bay  by 
specific  doubt  at  one  point  raising,  as  all  doubt  does, 
the  question  for  the  whole,  I would  hold  up  a light 
which  has  often  been  kind  to  me.  There  is  a sense 
of  solidity  about  a Law  of  Nature  which  belongs  to 
nothing  else  in  the  world.  Here,  at  last,  amid  all  that 
is  shifting,  is  one  thing  sure ; one  thing  outside  our- 
selves, unbiassed,  unprejudiced,  uninfluenced  by  like 
or  dislike,  by  doubt  or  fear ; one  thing  that  holds  on 
its  way  to  me  eternally,  incorruptible,  and  undefiled. 
This,  more  than  anything  else,  makes  one  eager  to 
see  the  Reign  of  Law  traced  in  the  Spiritual  Sphere. 
And  should  this  seem  to  some  to  offer  only  a surer, 


PREFACE. 


KXiT 


but  not  a higher  Faith ; should  the  better  ordering  oi 
the  Spiritual  World  appear  to  satisfy  the  intellect  at 
the  sacrifice  of  reverence,  simplicity,  or  love ; espe- 
cially should  it  seem  to  substitute  a Reign  of  Law 
and  a Lawgiver  for  a Kingdom  of  Grace  and  a Per- 
sonal God,  I will  say,  with  Browning, — 

^ I spoke  as  I saw. 

I report,  as  a man  may  of  God’s  work — airs  Lovcy  yet  airs 
Law. 

Now  I lay  down  the  judgeship  He  lent  me.  Each  faculty 
tasked, 

To  perceive  Him,  has  gained  an  abyss  where  a dewdiop  was 


ANALYSIS  OF  INTRODUCTION. 


[For  the  sake  of  the  general  reader  who  may  desire  to  pass  at  onc« 
to  the  practical  applications,  the  following  outline  of  the  Introductior 
— devoted  rather  to  general  principles — is  here  presented,] 

PART  I. 

Natural  Law  in  the  Spiritual  Sphere. 

1.  The  growth  of  the  Idea  of  Law. 

2.  Its  gradual  extension  throughout  every  department  of  Know- 

ledge. 

3.  Except  one.  Religion  hitherto  the  Great  Exception.  Why  so  ? 

4.  Previous  attempts  to  trace  analogies  between  the  Natural  and 

Spiritual  spheres.  These  have  been  limited  to  analogies 
between  Phenomena ; and  are  useful  mainly  as  illustra- 
tions. Analogies  of  Law  would  also  have  a Scientific 
value. 

5.  Wherein  that  value  would  consist,  (i)  The  Scientific  de- 

mand of  the  age  would  be  met ; (2)  Greater  clearness 
would  be  introduced  into  Religion  practically  ; (3)  Theo- 
logy, instead  of  resting  on  Authority,  would  rest  equally 
on  Nature. 

PART  II. 

The  Law  of  Continuity. 

A priori  argument  for  Natural  Law  in  the  spiritual  world. 

1.  The  Law  Discovered. 

2.  „ Defined. 

3.  „ Applied. 

4.  The  objection  answered  that  the  material  of  the  Natural  and 

Spiritual  worlds  being  different  they  must  be  under 
different  Laws. 

5.  The  existence  of  Laws  in  the  Spiritual  world  other  than  the 

Natural  Laws  (i)  improbable,  (2)  unnecessary,  (3)  un- 
known. Qualification. 

6.  The  Spiritual  not  the  projection  upwards  of  the  Natural ; but 

the  Natural  the  projection  downwards  of  the  Spiritual 


B 


^ Fkis  method  tufns  aside  from  hypotheses  not  to  be  tested  by 
my  known  logical  canon  familiar  to  science^  whether  the  hypo* 
thesis  claims  support  from  intuition^  aspiration  or  general 
plausibility.  And,  again,  this  method  turns  CLside  from  ideal 
standards  which  avow  themselves  to  be  lawless,  which  profess 
to  transcend  the  field  of  law.  We  say,  life  and  conduct  shall 
stand  for  us  wholly  on  a basis  of  law,  and  must  rest  entirely 
in  that  region  of  science  {not  physical,  but  moral  and  social 
science),  where  we  are  free  to  use  our  intelligence  in  the  methods 
known  to  us  as  intelligible  logic,  methods  which  the  intellect 
can  analyse.  When  you  confront  us  with  hypotheses,  however 
sublime  and  however  affecting,  if  they  cannot  be  stated  in  te^'ms 
of  the  rest  of  our  knowledge,  if  they  are  disparate  to  that  world 
of  sequence  and  sensation  which  to  us  is  the  ultimate  base  of 
all  our  real  knowledge,  then  we  shake  our  heads  and  turn 
%sideF 


Frederick  Harrison, 


INTRODUCTION. 

“Ethical  science  is  already  for  ever  completed,  so  far  as 
her  general  outline  and  main  principles  are  concerned,  and 
has  been,  as  it  were,  waiting  for  physical  science  to  come  up 
with  her.” — Paradoxical  Philbsophy. 

1. 

Natural  Law  is  a new  word.  It  is  the  last  and 
the  most  magnificent  discovery  of  science.  No 
more  telling  proof  is  open  to  the  modern  world  of 
the  greatness  of  the  idea  than  the  greatness  of  the 
attempts  which  have  always  been  made  to  justify  it. 
In  the  earlier  centuries,  before  the  birth  of  science, 
Phenomena  were  studied  alone.  The  world  then  was 
a chaos,  a collection  of  single,  isolated,  and  inde- 
pendent facts.  Deeper  thinkers  saw,  indeed,  that 
relations  must  subsist  between  these  facts,  but  the 
Reign  of  Law  was  never  more  to  the  ancients  than 
a far-off  vision.  Their  philosophies,  conspicuously 
those  of  the  Stoics  and  Pythagoreans,  heroically 
sought  to  marshal  the  discrete  materials  of  the 
universe  into  thinkable  form,  but  from  these  artificial 
and  fantastic  systems  nothing  remains  to  us  now  but 


4 


INTRODUCTION. 


an  ancient  testimony  to  the  grandeur  of  that  har- 
mony which  they  failed  to  reach. 

With  Copernicus,  Galileo,  and  Kepler  the  first 
regular  lines  of  the  universe  began  to  be  discerned. 
When  Nature  yielded  to  Newton  her  great  secret, 
Gravitation  was  felt  to  be  not  greater  as  a fact  in 
itself  than  as  a revelation  that  Law  was  fact.  And 
thenceforth  the  search  for  individual  Phenomena 
gave  way  before  the  larger  study  of  their  relations. 
The  pursuit  of  Law  became  the  passion  of  science. 

What  that  discovery  of  Law  has  done  for  Nature, 
it  is  impossible  to  estimate.  As  a mere  spectacle  the 
universe  to-day  discloses  a beauty  so  transcendent 
that  he  who  disciplines  himself  by  scientific  work 
finds  it  an  overwhelming  reward  simply  to  behold  it. 
In  these  Laws  one  stands  face  to  face  with  truth, 
solid  and  unchangeable.  Each  single  Law  is  an 
instrument  of  scientific  research,  simple  in  its  ad- 
justments, umversal  in  its  application,  infallible  in  its 
results.  And  despite  the  limitations  of  its  sphere  on 
every  side  Law  is  still  the  largest,*  richest,  and  surest 
source  of  human  knowledge. 

It  is  not  necessary  for  the  present  to  more  than 
lightly  touph  on  definitions  of  Natural  Law.  The 
Duke  of  Argyll  ^ indicates  five  senses  in  which  the 


* ^ Reign  of  Law,"  chap.  iL 


INTRODUCTION. 


% 


word  is  used,  but  we  may  content  ourselves  here  by 
taking  it  in  its  most  simple  and  obvious  significance 
The  fundamental  conception  of  Law  is  an  ascertained 
working  sequence  or  constant  order  among  the 
Phenomena  of  Nature.  This  impression  of  Law  as 
order  it  is  important  to  receive  in  its  simplicity,  for 
the  idea  is  often  corrupted  by  having  attached  to  it 
erroneous  views  of  cause  and  effect.  In  its  true 
sense  Natural  Law  predicates  nothing  of  causes. 
The  Laws  of  Nature  are  simply  statements  of  the 
orderly  condition  of  things  in  Nature,  what  is  found 
in  Nature  by  a sufficient  number  of  competent  ob- 
servers. What  these  Laws  are  in  themselves  is  not 
agreed.  That  they  have  any  absolute  existence  even 
is  far  from  certain.  They  are  relative  to  man  in  his 
many  limitations,  and  represent  for  him  the  constant 
expression  of  what  he  may  always  expect  to  find  in 
the  world  around  him.  But  that  they  have  any 
causal  connection  with  the  things  around  him  is  not 
to  be  conceived.  The  Natural  Laws  originate  nothing, 
sustain  nothing ; they  are  merely  responsible  for 
uniformity  in  sustaining  what  has  been  originated 
and  what  is  being  sustained.  They  are  modes  of 
operation,  therefore,  not  operators ; processes,  not 
powers.  The  Law  of  Gravitation,  for  instance,  speaks 
to  science  only  of  process.  It  has  no  light  to  offer  as 
to  itself.  Newton  did  not  discover  Gravity — that  is 


6 


INTRODUCTION. 


not  discovered  yet.  He  discovered  its  Law,  which  is 
Gravitation,  but  that  tells  us  nothing  of  its  origin,  oi 
its  nature,  or  of  its  cause. 

The  Natural  Laws  then  are  great  lines  running 
not  only  through  the  world,  but,  as  we  now  know, 
through  the  universe,  reducing  it  like  parallels  of 
latitude  to  intelligent  order.  In  themselves,  be  it 
once  more  repeated,  they  may  have  no  more  absolute 
existence  than  parallels  of  latitude.  But  they  exist 
for  us.  They  are  drawn  for  us  to  understand  the 
part  by  some  Hand  that  drew  the  whole ; so  drawn, 
perhaps,  that,  understanding  the  part,  we  too  in  time 
may  learn  to  understand  the  whole.  Now  the  inquiry 
we  propose  to  ourselves  resolves  itself  into  the  simple 
question.  Do  these  lines  stop  with  what  we  call  the 
Natural  sphere?  Is  it  not  possible  that  they  may 
lead  further  ? Is  it  probable  that  the  Hand  which 
ruled  them  gave  up  the  work  where  most  of  all  they 
were  required  ? Did  that  Hand  divide  the  world  into 
two,  a cosmos  and  a chaos,  the  higher  being  the 
chaos  > With  Nature  as  the  symbol  of  all  of  har- 
mony and  beauty  that  is  known  to  man,  must  we  still 
talk  of  the  super-natural,  not  as  a convenient  word, 
but  as  a different  order  of  world,  an  unintelligible 
world,  where  the  Reign  of  Mystery  supersedes  the 
Reign  of  Law  ? 

This  question,  let  it  be  carefully  observed,  applies 


INTRODUCTION, 


7 


CO  Laws  not  to  Phenomena.  That  the  Phenomena 
of  the  Spiritual  World  are  in  analogy  with  the  Phe- 
nomena of  the  Natural  World  requires  no  restate 
ment.  Since  Plato  enunciated  his  doctrine  of  the 
Cave  or  of  the  twice-divided  line  ; since  Christ  spake 
in  parables  ; since  Plotinus  wrote  of  the  world  as 
an  imaged  image  ; since  the  mysticism  of  Sweden- 
borg ; since  Bacon  and  Pascal ; since  Sartor  Re- 
sartus  ” and  In  Memoriam,”  it  has  been  all  but  a 
commonplace  with  thinkers  that  “ the  invisible  things 
of  God  from  the  creation  of  the  world  are  clearly 
seen,  being  understood  by  the  things  that  are  made,” 
Milton's  question — 

“ What  if  earth 

Be  but  the  shadow  of  heaven,  and  things  therein 

Each  to  other  like  more  than  on  earth  is  thought  ? * 

is  now  superfluous.  In  our  doctrine  of  represen- 
tations and  correspondences,”  says  Swedenborg,  “ we 
shall  treat  of  both  these  symbolical  and  typical 
resemblances,  and  of  the  astonishing  things  that 
occur,  I will  not  say  in  the  living  body  only,  but 
throughout  Nature,  and  which  correspond  so  entirely 
to  supreme  and  spiritual  things,  that  one  would 
swear  that  the  physical  world  was  purely  sym- 
bolical of  the  spiritual  world.^  ” And  Cii»lyle  \ 


^ ^Animal  Kingdom.^ 


8 


INTRODUCTION. 


**  All  visible  things  are  emblems.  What  thou 
seest  is  not  there  on  its  own  account ; strictly 
speaking  is  not  there  at  all.  Matter  exists  only 
spiritually,  and  to  represent  some  idea  and  body 
it  forth."  1 

But  the  analogies  of  Law  are  a totally  different 
thing  from  the  analogies  of  Phenomena  and  have  a 
very  different  value.  To  say  generally,  with  Pascal, 
that  ‘‘La  nature  est  une  image  de  la  grace,”  is 
merely  to  be  poetical.  The  function  of  Hervey's 
“ Meditations  in  a Flower  Garden,”  or,  FlaveFs 
“ Husbandry  Spiritualized,”  is  mainly  homiletical. 
That  such  works  have  an  interest  is  not  to  be  denied. 
The  place  of  parable  in  teaching,  and  especially 
after  the  sanction  of  the  greatest  of  Teachers,  must 
always  be  recognised.  The  very  necessities  of 
language  indeed  demand  this  method  of  presenting 
truth.  The  temporal  is  the  husk  and  framework  of 
the  eternal,  and  thoughts  can  be  uttered  only  through 
things.^ 

^ ‘‘Sartor  Resartus,”  1858  ed.,  p.  43. 

* Even  parable,  however,  has  always  been  considered  to  have 
attached  to  it  a measure  of  evidential  as  well  as  of  illustrative 
value.  Thus  : “The  parable  or  other  analogy  to  spiritual  truth 
appropriated  from  the  world  of  nature  or  man,  is  not  merely 
illustrative,  but  also  in  some  sort  proof.  It  is  not  merely  tha^ 
these  analogies  assist  to  make  the  truth  intelligible  or,  if  in- 
telligible before,  present  it  more  vividly  to  the  mind,  which  is 
all  that  some  will  allow  them.  Their  power  lies  deeper  than 


INTRODUCTION. 


$ 

But  analogies  between  Phenomena  bear  the  same 
relation  to  analogies  of  Law  that  Phenomena  them^ 
selves  bear  to  Law.  The  light  of  Law  on  truth,  as 
we  have  seen,  is  an  immense  advance  upon  the 
light  of  Phenomena.  The  discovery  of  Law  is  sim- 
ply the  discovery  of  Science.  And  if  the  analogies 
of  Natural  Law  can  be  extended  to  the  Spiritual 
World,  that  whole  region  at  once  falls  within  the 
domain  of  science  and  secures  a basis  as  well  as  an 
illumination  in  the  constitution  and  course  of  Nature. 
All,  therefore,  that  has  been  claimed  for  parable 
can  be  predicated  4 fortiori  of  this — with  the  ad- 
dition that  a proof  on  the  basis  of  Law  would 
want  no  criterion  possessed  by  the  most  advanced 
science. 

That  the  validity  of  analogy  generally  has  been 
seriously  questioned  one  must  frankly  own.  Doubt- 
less there  is  much  difficulty  and  even  liability  to 
gross  error  in  attempting  to  establish  analogy  in 
specific  cases.  The  value  of  the  likeness  appears 

this,  in  the  harmony  unconsciously  felt  by  all  men,  and  which  all 
deeper  minds  have  delighted  to  trace,  between  the  natural  and 
spiritual  worlds,  so  that  analogies  from  the  first  are  felt  to  be 
something  more  than  illustrations  happily  but  yet  arbitrarily 
chosen.  They  are  arguments,  and  may  be  alleged  as  witnesses  ; 
the  world  of  nature  being  throughout  a witness  for  the  world  of 
spirit,  proceeding  from  the  same  hand,  growing  out  of  the  same 
root,  and  being  constituted  for  that  very  end.”— (Archbishop 
Trench  ; “Parables,”  pp.  12,  13,) 


lO 


INTRODUCTION, 


differently  to  different  minds,  and  in  discussing  an 
individual  instance  questions  of  relevancy  will  in 
variably  crop  up.  Of  course,  in  the  language  of 
John  Stuart  Mill,  ‘‘  when  the  analogy  can  be  proved, 
the  argument  founded  upon  it  cannot  be  resisted.’'  ^ 
But  so  great  is  the  difficulty  of  proof  that  many  are 
compelled  to  attach  the  most  inferior  weight  to 
analogy  as  a method  of  reasoning.  ‘^Analogical 
evidence  is  generally  more  successful  in  silencing 
objections  than  in  evincing  truth.  Though  it  rarely 
refutes  it  frequently  repels  refutation  ; like  those 
weapons  which  though  they  cannot  kill  the  enemy, 
will  ward  his  blows.  ...  It  must  be  allowed 
that  analogical  evidence  is  at  least  but  a feeble 
support,  and  is  hardly  ever  honoured  with  the  name 
of  proof.”  ^ Other  authorities  on  the  other  hand,  such 
as  Sir  William  Hamilton,  admit  analogy  to  a primary 
place  in  logic  and  regard  it  as  the  very  basis  of 
induction. 

But,  fortunately,  we  are  spared  all  discussion  on 
this  worn  subject,  for  two  cogent  reasons.  For  one 
thing,  we  do  not  demand  of  Nature  directly  to 
prove  Religion.  That  was  never  its  function.  Its 
function  is  to  interpret.  And  this,  after  all,  is  pos- 
sibly the  most  fruitful  proof.  The  best  proof  of  a 

^ MilFs  “ Logic,”  vol.  ii.  p.  96. 

8 Campbeirs  “Rhetoric,”  vol.  i.  p.  I14. 


INTRODUCTION. 


11 


thing  is  that  we  see  it ; if  we  do  not  see  it,  perhaps 
proof  will  not  convince  us  of  it.  It  is  the  want 
of  the  discerning  faculty,  the  clairvoyant  power 
of  seeing  the  eternal  in  the  temporal,  rather  than 
the  failure  of  the  reason,  that  begets  the  sceptic. 
But  secondly,  and  more  particularly,  a significant 
circumstance  has  to  be  taken  into  account,  which, 
though  it  will  appear  more  clearly  afterwards,  may 
be  stated  here  at  once.  The  position  we  have  been 
led  to  take  up  is  not  that  the  Spiritual  Laws  are 
analogous  to  the  Natural  Laws,  but  that  they  are 
the  same  Laws.  It  is  not  a question  of  analogy 
but  of  Identity.  The  Natural  Laws  are  not  the 
shadows  or  images  of  the  Spiritual  in  the  same  sense 
as  autumn  is  emblematical  of  Decay,  or  the  falling 
leaf  of  Death.  The  Natural  Laws,  as  the  Law  of 
Continuity  might  well  warn  us,  do  not  stop  with 
the  visible  and  then  give  place  to  a new  set  of 
Laws  bearing  a strong  similitude  to  them.  The 
Laws  of  the  invisible  are  the  same  Laws,  projections 
of  the  natural  not  supernatural.  Analogous  Phe- 
nomena are  not  the  fruit  of  parallel  Laws,  but  of 
the  same  Laws — Laws  which  at  one  end,  as  it 
were,  may  be  dealing  with  Matter,  at  the  other 
end  with  Spirit.  As  there  will  be  some  incon- 
venience, however,  in  dispensing  with  the  word 
analogy,  we  shall  continue  occasionally  to  employ  it 


INTRODUCTION. 


la 

Those  who  apprehend  the  real  relation  will  mentally 
substitute  the  larger  term. 

Let  us  now  look  for  a moment  at  the  present 
state  of  the  question.  Can  it  be  said  that  the  Laws 
of  the  Spiritual  World  are  in  any  sense  considered 
even  to  have  analogies  with  the  Natural  World 
Here  and  there  certainly  one  finds  an  attempt,  and 
a successful  attempt,  to  exhibit  on  a rational  basis 
one  or  two  of  the  great  Moral  Principles  of  the 
Spiritual  World.  But  the  Physical  World  has  not 
been  appealed  to.  Its  magnificent  system  of  Laws 
remains  outside,  and  its  contribution  meanwhile  is 
either  silently  ignored  or  purposely  set  aside.  The 
Physical,  it  is  said,  is  too  remote  from  the  Spiritual. 
The  Moral  World  may  afford  a basis  for  religious 
truth,  but  even  this  is  often  the  baldest  con- 
cession ; while  the  appeal  to  the  Physical  universe 
is  everywhere  dismissed  as,  on  the  face  of  it, 
irrelevant  and  unfruitful.  From  the  scientific 
side,  again,  nothing  has  been  ^ohq  to  court  a 
closer  fellowship.  Science  has  taken  theology  at  its 
own  estimate.  It  is  a thing  apart  The  Spiritual 
World  is  not  only  a different  world,  but  a different 
kind  of  world,  a world  arranged  on  a totally 
different  principle,  under  a different  governmental 
scheme. 

The  Reign  of  Law  has  gradually  crept  into  every 


INTRODUCTION, 


13 


department  of  Nature,  transforming  knowledge 
everywhere  into  Science.  The  process  goes  on,  and 
Nature  slowly  appears  to  us  as  one  great  unity, 
until  the  borders  of  the  Spiritual  World  are  reached. 
There  the  Law  of  Continuity  ceases,  and  the  har- 
mony breaks  down.  And  men  who  have  learned 
their  elementary  lessons  truly  from  the  alphabet  of 
the  lower  Law^s,  going  on  to  seek  a higher  know- 
ledge, are  suddenly  confronted  with  the  Great  Ex- 
ception. 

Even  those  who  have  examined  most  carefully 
the  relations  of  the  Natural  and  the  Spiritual,  seem 
to  have  committed  themselves  deliberately  to  a 
final  separation  in  matters  of  Law.  It  is  a surprise 
to  find  such  a writer  as  Horace  Bushnell,  for 
instance,  describing  the  Spiritual  World  as  another 
system  of  nature  incommunicably  separate  from 
ours,*'  and  further  defining  it  thus  : “ God  has,  in 
fact,  erected  another  and  higher  system,  that  of 
spiritual  being  and  government  for  which  nature 
exists  ; a system  not  under  the  law  of  cause  and 
effect,  but  ruled  and  marshalled  under  other  kinds 
of  laws."  ^ Few  men  have  shown  more  insight 
than  Bushnell  in  illustrating  Spiritual  truth  from  the 
Natural  World  ; but  he  has  not  only  failed  to  per- 


“ Nature  and  the  Supernatural,”  p.  19. 


INTRODUCTION, 


S4 

ceive  the  analogy  with  regard  to  Law,  but  em- 
phatically denies  it. 

In  the  recent  literature  of  this  whole  region  there 
nowhere  seems  any  advance  upon  the  position  of 
“Nature  and  the  Supernatural.”  All  are  agreed  in 
speaking  of  Nature  and  the  Supernatural.  Nature 
in  the  Supernatural,  so  far  as  Laws  are  concerned, 
is  still  an  unknown  truth. 

“The  Scientific  Basis  of  Faith”  is  a suggestive 
title.  The  accomplished  author  announces  that 
the  object  of  his  investigation  is  to  show  that 
“the  world  of  nature  and  mind,  as  made  known 
oy  science,  constitute  a basis  and  a preparation 
lor  that  highest  moral  and  spiritual  life  of  ‘man, 
which  is  evoked  by  the  self-revelation  of  God.”^ 
On  the  whole,  Mr.  Murphy  seems  to  be  more 
philosophical  and  more  profound  in  his  view  of  the 
relation  of  science  and  religion  than  any  writer  of 
modern  times.  His  conception  of  religion  is  broad 
and  k)fty,  his  acquaintance  with  science  adequate. 
He  makes  constant,  admirable,  and  often  original 
use  of  analogy  ; and  yet,  in  spite  of  the  promise 
of  this  quotation,  he  has  failed  to  find  any  analogy 
in  that  department  of  Law  where  surely,  of  all 
others,  it  might  most  reasonably  be  looked  for, 


^ **The  Scientific  Basis  of  Faith.”  By  J.  J,  Mnrphy,  p.  466, 


INTRODUCTION. 


n 

In  the  broad  subject  even  of  the  analogies  of  what 
he  defines  as  “ evangelical  religion  ” with  Nature, 
Mr.  Murphy  discovers  nothing.  Nor  can  this  be 
traced  either  to  short-sight  or  over-sight  The  sub- 
ject  occurs  to  him  more  than  once,  and  he  deliber- 
ately dismisses  it — dismisses  it  not  merely  as  un- 
fruitful, but  with  a distinct  denial  of  its  relevancy. 
The  memorable  paragraph  from  Origen  which 
forms  the  text  of  Butler’s  ‘‘  Analogy,”  he  calls 
“this  shallow  and  false  saying.”^  He  says:  “The 
designation  of  Butler’s  scheme  of  religious  philo- 
sophy ought  then  to  be  the  analogy  of  religion^ 
legal  and  evangelical^  to  the  constitution  of  natui^e. 
But  does  this  give  altogether  a true  meaning  ? 
Does  this  double  analogy  really  exist  ? If  justice 
is  natural  law  among  beings  having  a moral 
nature,  there  is  the  closest  analogy  between  the 
constitution  of  nature  and  merely  legal  religion. 
Legal  religion  is  only  the  extension  of  natural 
justice  into  a future  life.  . . . But  is  this  true 

of  evangelical  religion  ? Have  the  doctrines  of 
Divine  grace  any  similar  support  in  the  analogies  of 
nature  ? I trow  not.”  ^ And  with  reference  to  a 
specific  question,  speaking  of  immortality,  he  asserts 
that  “the  analogies  of  mere  nature  are  opposed  to 
the  doctrine  of  immortality.”* 

» Op.  cit.,  p.  333. 


» Hid,  p.  333. 


* Ididy  p.  331. 


C6 


INTRODUCTION, 


With  regard  to  Butler's  great  work  in  this  de- 
partment, it  is  needless  at  this  time  of  day  to  point 
out  that  his  aims  did  not  lie  exactly  in  this  direc- 
tion He  did  not  seek  to  indicate  analogies 
between  religion  and  the  constitution  and  course  of 
Nature.  His  theme  was,  “ The  Analogy  of  Religion 
to  the  constitution  and  course  of  Nature."  And 
although  he  pointed  out  direct  analogies  of  Phe- 
nomena, such  as  those  between  the  metamorphoses 
of  insects  and  the  doctrine  of  a future  state ; and 
although  he  showed  that  the  natural  and  moral 
constitution  and  government  of  the  world  are  so 
connected  as  to  make  up  together  but  one  scheme,"  ^ 
his  real  intention  was  not  so  much  to  construct 
arguments  as  to  repel  objections.  His  emphasis 
accordingly  was  laid  upon  the  difficulties  of  the  two 
schemes  rather  than  on  their  positive  lines ; and 
so  thoroughly  has  he  made  out  his  point,  that  as 
is  well  known,  the  effect  upon  many  has  been,  not 
to  lead  them  to  accept  the  Spiritual  World  on  the 
ground  of  the  Natural,  but  to  make  them  despair 
of  both.  Butler  lived  at  a time  when  defence  was 
more  necessary  than  construction,  when  the  materials 
for  construction  were  scarce  and  insecure,  and  when, 
besides,  some  of  the  things  to  be  defended  wqvq 


* Analogy,”  chap.  viL 


INTRODUCTION, 


quite  incapable  of  defence.  Notwithstanding  this, 
his  influence  over  the  whole  field  since  has  been 
unparalleled. 

After  all,  then,  the  Spiritual  World,  as  it  appears 
at  this  moment,  is  outside  Natural  Law.  Theology 
continues  to  be  considered,  as  it  has  always  been, 
a thing  apart.  It  remains  still  a stupendous  and 
splendid  construction,  but  on  lines  altogether  its 
own.  Nor  is  Theology  to  be  blamed  for  this.  Nature 
has  been  long  in  speaking ; even  yet  its  voice  is 
low,  sometimes  inaudible.  Science  is  the  true  de- 
faulter, for  Theology  had  to  wait  patiently  for  its 
development.  As  the  highest  of  the  sciences, 
Theology  in  the  order  of  evolution  should  be  the 
last  to  fall  into  rank.  It  is  reserved  for  it  to  perfect 
the  final  harmony.  Still,  if  it  continues  longer  to 
remain  a thing  apart,  with  increasing  reason  will  be 
such  protests  as  this  of  the  Unseen  Universe,”  when, 
in  speaking  of  a view  of  miracles  held  by  an  older 
Theology,  it  declares  : — ‘‘  If  he  submits  to  be  guided 
by  such  interpreters,  each  intelligent  being  will  for 
ever  continue  to  be  baffled  in  any  attempt  to  explain 
these  phenomena,  because  they  are  said  to  have  no 
physical  relation  to  anything  that  went  before  or  that 
followed  after ; in  fine,  they  are  made  to  form  a 
universe  within  a universe,  a portion  cut  off  by  an 


i8 


INTRODUCTION. 


insurmountable  barrier  from  the  domain  of  scientific 
inquiry/’  ^ 

This  is  the  secret  of  the  present  decadence  of 
Religion  in  the  world  of  Science.  For  Science  can 
hear  nothing  of  a Great  Exception.  Constructions 
on  unique  lines,  ‘‘  portions  cut  off  by  an  insurmount- 
able barrier  from  the  domain  of  scientific  inquiry,” 
it  dare  not  recognise.  Nature  has  taught  it  this 
lesson,  and  Nature  is  right.  It  is  the  province  of 
Science  to  vindicate  Nature  here  at  auy  hazard. 
But  in  blaming  Theology  for  its  intolerance,  it  has 
been  betrayed  into  an  intolerance  less  excusable.  It 
has  pronounced  upon  it  too  soon.  What  if  Religion 
be  yet  brought  within  the  sphere  of  Law  ? Law  is 
the  revelation  of  time.  One  by  one  slowly  through 
the  centuries  the  Sciences  have  crystallized  into  geo- 
metrical form,  each  form  not  only  perfect  in  itself, 
but  perfect  in  its  relation  to  all  other  forms.  Many 
forms  had  to  be  perfected  before  the  form  of  the 
Spiritual.  The  Inorganic  has  to  be  worked  out  before 
the  Organic,  the  Natural  before  the  Spiritual.  Theology 
at  present  has  merely  an  ancient  and  provisional  phi- 
losophic form.  By-and-by  it  will  be  seen  whether  it 
be  not  susceptible  of  another.  For  Theology  must 
pass  through  the  necessary  stages  of  progress,  like 


* “ Unseen  Universe,”  6th  ed.,  pp.  89, 90. 


INTRODUCTION. 


*9 


any  other  science.  The  method  of  science-making 
is  now  fully  established.  In  almost  all  cases  the 
natural  history  and  development  are  the  same. 
Take,  for  example,  the  case  of  Geology.  A century 
ago  there  was  none.  Science  went  out  to  look  for  it, 
and  brought  back  a Geology  which,  if  Nature  were  a 
harmony,  had  falsehood  written  almost  on  its  face. 
It  was  the  Geology  of  Catastrophism,  a Geology  so  out 
of  line  with  Nature  as  revealed  by  the  other  sciences, 
that  on  d prior'i  grounds  a thoughtful  mind  might 
have  been  justified  in  dismissing  it  as  a final  form  of 
any  science.  And  its  fallacy  was  soon  and  tho- 
roughly exposed.  The  advent  of  modified  unifor- 
mitarian  principles  all  but  banished  the  word  catas- 
trophe from  science,  and  marked  the  birth  of  Geo- 
logy as  we  know  it  now.  Geology,  that  is  to  say,  had 
fallen  at  last  into  the  great  scheme  of  Law.  Reli- 
gious doctrines,  many  of  them  at  least,  have  been  up 
to  this  time  all  but  as  catastrophic  as  the  old  Geology. 
They  are  not  on  the  lines  of  Nature  as  we  have 
learned  to  decipher  her.  If  any  one  feel,  as  Science 
complains  that  it  feels,  that  the  lie  of  things  in  the 
Spiritual  World  as  arranged  by  Theology  is  not  in 
harmony  with  the  world  around,  is  not,  in  short, 
scientific,  he  is  entitled  to  raise  the  question  whether 
this  be  really  the  final  form  of  those  departments  of 
Theology  to  which  his  complaint  refers.  He  is  justi- 


£0 


INTRODUCTION. 


fied,  moreover,  in  demanding  a new  investigation 
with  all  moaern  methods  and  resources ; and  Science 
is  bound  by  its  principles  not  less  than  by  the  lessons 
of  its  own  past,  to  suspend  judgment  till  the  last 
attempt  is  made.  The  success  of  such  an  attempt 
will  be  looked  forward  to  with  hopefulness  or  fearful- 
ness just  in  proportion  to  one’s  confidence  in  Nature 
— in  proportion  to  one’s  belief  in  the  divinity  of  man 
and  in  the  divinity  of  things.  If  there  is  any  truth 
in  the  unity  of  Nature,  in  that  supreme  principle  of 
Continuity  which  is  growing  in  splendour  with  every 
discovery  of  science,  the  conclusion  is  foregone.  If 
there  is  any  foundation  for  Theology,  if  the  pheno- 
mena of  the  Spiritual  World  are  real,  in  the  nature 
of  things  they  ought  to  come  into  the  sphere  of 
Law.  Such  is  at  once  the  demand  of  Science  upon 
Religion  and  the  prophecy  that  it  can  and  shall  be 
fulfilled. 

The  Botany  of  Linnaeus,  a purely  artificial  system, 
was  a splendid  contribution  to  human  knowledge, 
and  did  more  in  its  day  to  enlarge  the  view  of  the 
vegetable  kingdom  than  all  that  had  gone  before. 
But  all  artificial  systems  must  pass  away.  None  knew 
better  than  the  great  Swedish  naturalist  himself  that 
hi 5 system,  being  artificial,  was  but  provisional. 
Nature  must  be  read  in  its  own  light.  And  as  the 
botanical  field  became  more  luminous,  the  system  of 


INTRODUCTION, 


21 


Jussieu  and  De  Candolle  slowly  emerged  as  a native 
growth,  unfolded  itself  as  naturally  as  the  petals  of 
one  of  its  own  flowers,  and  forcing  itself  upon  men’s 
intelligence  as  the  very  voice  of  Nature,  banished 
the  Linnaean  system  for  ever.  It  were  unjust  to  say 
that  the  present  Theology  is  as  artificial  as  the  sys- 
tem of  Linnaeus ; in  many  particulars  it  wants  but  a 
fresh  expression  to  make  it  in  the  most  modern  sense 
scientific.  But  if  it  has  a basis  in  the  constitution 
and  course  of  Nature,  that  basis  has  never  been  ade- 
quately shown.  It  has  depended  on  Authority  rather 
than  on  Law ; and  a new  basis  must  be  sought  and 
found  if  it  is  to  be  presented  to  those  with  whom 
Law  alone  is  Authority. 

It  is  not  of  course  to  be  inferred  that  the  scientific 
method  will  ever  abolish  the  radical  distinctions  of 
the  Spiritual  World.  True  science  proposes  to  itself 
no  such  general  levelling  in  any  department.  Within 
the  unity  of  the  whole  there  must  always  be  room 
for  the  characteristic  differences  of  the  parts,  and 
those  tendencies  of  thought  at  the  present  time 
which  ignore  such  distinctions,  in  their  zeal  for 
simplicity  really  create  confusion.  As  has  been 
well  said  by  Mr.  Hutton : ‘‘  Any  attempt  to  merge 
the  distinctive  characteristic  of  a higher  science  in  a 
lower — of  chemical  changes  in  mechanical — of  phy^ 
siological  in  chemical — above  all,  of  mental  changes 


23 


INTRODUCTION, 


in  physiological — is  a neglect  of  the  radical  assump< 
tion  of  all  science,  because  it  is  an  attempt  to  deduce 
representations — or  rather  misrepresentations — of  one 
kind  of  phenomenon  from  a conception  of  another 
kind  which  does  not  contain  it,  and  must  have  it 
implicitly  and  illicitly  smuggled  in  before  it  can  be 
extracted  out  of  it.  Hence,  instead  of  increasing 
our  means  of  representing  the  universe  to  ourselves 
without  the  detailed  examination  of  particulars,  such 
a procedure  leads  to  misconstructions  of  fact  on  the 
basis  of  an  imported  theory,  and  generally  ends  in 
forcibly  perverting  the  least-known  science  to  the 
type  of  the  better  known.’'  ^ 

What  is  wanted  is  simply  a unity  of  conception, 
but  not  such  a unity  of  conception  as  should  be 
founded  on  an  absolute  identity  of  phenomena 
This  latter  might  indeed  be  a unity,  but  it  would 
be  a very  tame  one.  The  perfection  of  unity  is 
attained  where  there  is  infinite  variety  of  phe- 
nomena, infinite  complexity  of  relation,  but  great 
simplicity  of  Law.  Science  will  be  complete  when  all 
known  phenomena  can  be  arranged  in  one  vast  circle 
in  which  a few  well  known  Laws  shall  form  the  radii — 
these  radii  at  once  separating  and  uniting,  separating 
into  particular  groups,  yet  uniting  all  to  a common 
centre.  To  show  that  the  radii  for  some  of  the  most 
* Essays,^^  vol.  . p.  40. 


INTRODUCTION. 


23 


characteristic  phenomena  of  the  Spiritual  World  are 
already  drawn  within  that  circle  by  science  is  the 
main  object  of  the  papers  which  follow.  There  will 
be  found  an  attempt  to  re-state  a few  of  the  more 
elementary  facts  of  the  Spiritual  Life  in  terms  of 
Biology.  Any  argument  for  Natural  Law  in  the 
Spiritual  World  may  be  best  tested  in  the  d posteriori 
form.  And  although  the  succeeding  pages  are  not 
designed  in  the  first  instance  to  prove  a principle, 
they  may  yet  be  entered  here  as  evidence.  The 
practical  test  is  a severe  one,  but  on  that  account  all 
the  more  satisfactory. 

And  what  will  be  gained  if  the  point  be  made  out  ? 
Not  a few  things.  For  one,  as  partly  indicated 
already,  the  scientific  demand  of  the  age  will  be 
satisfied.  That  demand  is  that  all  that  concerns 
life  and  conduct  shall  be  placed  on  a scientific  basis. 
The  only  great  attempt  to  meet  that  at  present  is 
Positivism. 

But  what  again  is  a scientific  basis  } What  exactly 
is  this  demand  of  the  age  ? “ By  Science  I under- 

stand,*' says  Huxley,  “all  knowledge  which  rests 
upon  evidence  and  reasoning  of  a like  character  to 
that  which  claims  our  assent  to  ordinary  scientific 
propositions  ; and  if  any  one  is  able  to  make  good 
the  assertion  that  his  theology  rests  upon  valid 
evidence  and  sound  reasoning,  then  it  appears  tc 


*4 


INTRODUCTION. 


me  that  such  theology  must  take  its  place  as  a part 
of  science/^  That  the  assertion  has  been  already 
made  good  is  claimed  by  many  who  deserve  to  be 
heard  on  questions  of  scientific  evidence.  But  if  more 
is  wanted  by  some  minds,  more  not  perhaps  of  a higher 
kind  but  of  a different  kind,  at  least  the  attempt  can 
be  made  to  gratify  them.  Mr.  Frederic  Harrison,^ 
in  name  of  the  Positive  method  of  thought,  ‘‘  turns 
aside  from  ideal  standards  which  avow  themselves  to 
be  lawless  [the  italics  are  Mr.  Harrison’s],  which  pro- 
fess to  transcend  the  field  of  law.  We  say,  life  and 
conduct  shall  stand  for  us  wholly  on  a basis  of  law, 
and  must  rest  entirely  in  that  region  of  science  (not 
physical,  but  moral  and  social  science)  where  we  are 
free  to  use  our  intelligence,  in  the  methods  known  to 
us  as  intelligible  logic,  methods  which  the  intellect 
can  analyse.  When  you  confront  us  with  hypotheses, 
however  sublime  and  however  affecting,  if  they  can- 
not be  stated  in  terms  of  the  rest  of  our  knowledge, 
if  they  are  disparate  to  that  world  of  sequence  and 
sensation  which  to  us  is  the  ultimate  base  of  all  our 
real  knowledge,  then  we  shake  our  heads  and  turn 
aside.”  This  is  a most  reasonable  demand,  and  we 
humbly  accept  the  challenge.  We  think  religious 
truth,  or  at  all  events  certain  of  tlie  largest  facts  ol 

* ‘‘A  Modern  Symposium.” — Nineteenth  Century^  voL  i 

p.  625. 


INTROD  UCTION. 


23 


the  Spiritual  Life,  can  be  stated  “ in  terms  of  the  rest 
of  our  knowledge.” 

We  do  not  say,  as  already  hinted,  that  the  pro^ 
po::a!  includes  an  attempt  to  prove  the  existence  of 
the  Spiritual  World.  Does  that  need  proof  And 
if  so,  what  sort  of  evidence  would  be  considered 
in  court  ? The  facts  of  the  Spiritual  World  are  as 
real  to  thousands  as  the  facts  of  the  Natural  World — 
and  more  real  to  hundreds.  But  were  one  asked  to 
prove  that  the  Spiritual  World  can  be  discerned  by 
the  appropriate  faculties,  one  would  do  it  precisely  as 
one  would  attempt  to  prove  the  Natural  World  to 
be  an  object  of  recognition  to  the  senses — and  with 
as  much  or  as  little  success.  In  either  instance 
probably  the  fact  would  be  found  incapable  of 
demonstration,  but  not  more  in  the  one  case  than  in 
the  other.  Were  one  asked  to  prove  the  existence 
of  Spiritual  Life,  one  would  also  do  it  exactly  as  one 
would  seek  to  prove  Natural  Life.  And  this  perhaps 
might  be  attempted  with  more  hope.  But  this  is 
not  on  the  immediate  programme.  Science  deals 
with  known  facts ; and  accepting  certain  known 
facts  in  the  Spiritual  World  we  proceed  to  arrange 
them,  to  discover  their  Laws,  to  inquire  if  they  can 
be  stated  “ in  terms  of  the  rest  of  our  knowledge.” 

At  the  same  time,  although  attempting  no  philo- 
sophical proof  of  the  existence  of  a Spiritual  Life 


INTRODUCTION 


96 

and  a Spiritual  World,  we  are  not  without  hope 
that  the  general  line  of  thought  here  may  be  useful 
to  some  who  are  honestly  inquiring  in  these  direc* 
tions.  The  stumbling-block  to  most  minds  is  pel- 
haps  less  the  mere  existence  of  the  unseen  than  the 
want  of  definition,  the  apparently  hopeless  vague- 
ness, and  not  least,  the  delight  in  this  vagueness  as 
mere  vagueness  by  some  who  look  upon  this  as 
the  mark  of  quality  in  Spiritual  things.  It  will 
be  at  least  something  to  tell  earnest  seekers  that 
the  Spiritual  World  is  not  a castle  in  the  air,  of  an 
architecture  unknown  to  earth  or  heaven,  but  a fair 
ordered  realm  furnished  with  many  familiar  things 
and  ruled  by  well-remembered  Laws. 

It  is  scarcely  necessary  to  emphasise  under  a 
second  head  the  gain  in  clearness.  The  Spiritual 
World  as  it  stands  is  full  of  perplexity.  One  can 
escape  doubt  only  by  escaping  thought.  With  re- 
gard to  many  important  articles  of  religion  per- 
haps the  best  and  the  worst  course  at  present  open 
to  a doubter  is  simple  credulity.  Who  is  to  answer 
ibr  this  state  of  things  ? It  comes  as  a necessary 
tax  for  improvement  on  the  age  in  which  we  live. 
The  old  ground  of  faith.  Authority,  is  given  up  ; 
the  new.  Science,  has  not  yet  taken  its  place.  Men 
did  not  require  to  see  truth  before ; they  only 
needed  to  believe  it.  Truth,  therefore,  had  not 


INTRODUCTION. 


27 


been  put  by  Theology  in  a seeing  form — which, 
however,  was  its  original  form.  But  now  they  ask 
to  see  it.  And  when  it  is  shown  them  they  start 
back  in  despair.  We  shall  not  say  what  they  see. 
But  we  shall  say  what  they  might  see.  If  the 
Natural  Laws  were  run  through  the  Spiritual  World, 
they  might  see  the  great  lines  of  religious  truth 
as  clearly  and  simply  as  the  broad  lines  of  science. 
As  they  gazed  into  that  Natural-Spiritual  World 
they  would  say  to  themselves,  “We  have  seen 
something  like  this  before.  This  order  is  known 
to  us.  It  is  not  arbitrary.  This  Law  here  is  that 
old  Law  there,  and  this  Phenomenon  here,  what  can 
it  be  but  that  which  stood  in  precisely  the  same 
relation  to  that  Law  yonder?”  And  so  gradually 
from  the  new  form  everything  assumes  new  meaning. 
So  the  Spiritual  World  becomes  slowly  Natural ; and, 
what  is  of  all  but  equal  moment,  the  Natural  World 
becomes  slowly  Spiritual.  Nature  is  not  a mere 
image  or  emblem  of  the  Spiritual.  It  is  a working 
model  of  the  Spiritual.  In  the  Spiritual  World  the 
same  wheels  revolve — but  without  the  iron.  The 
same  figures  flit  across  the  stage,  the  same  processes 
of  growth  go  on,  the  same  functions  are  discharged, 
the  same  biological  laws  prevail — only  with  a dif- 
ferent quality  of  /8/09.  Plato’s  prisoner,  if  not  out 
of  the  Cave,  has  at  least  his  face  to  the  light 


28 


INTRODUCTION. 


**  The  earth  is  cram’d  with  heaven, 

And  every  common  bush  afire  with  God.” 

How  much  of  the  Spiritual  World  is  covered  by 
Natural  law  we  do  not  propose  at  present  to  inquire. 
It  is  certain,  at  least,  that  the  whole  is  not  covered. 
And  nothing  more  lends  confidence  to  the  method 
than  this.  For  one  thing,  room  is  still  left  for 
mystery.  Had  no  place  remained  for  mystery  it 
had  proved  itsdf  both  unscientific  and  irreligious. 
A Science  without  mystery  is  unknown  ; a Religion 
without  mystery  is  absurd.  This  is  no  attempt  to 
reduce  Religion  to  a question  of  mathematics,  or 
demonstrate  God  in  biological  formulae.  The  elimi- 
nation of  mystery  from  the  universe  is  the  elimina- 
tion of  Religion.  However  far  the  scientific  method 
may  penetrate  the  Spiritual  World,  there  will  always 
remain  a region  to  be  explored  by  a scientific 
faith.  ‘‘I  shall  never  rise  to  the  point  of  view 
which  wishes  to  ‘raise'  faith  to  knowledge.  To 
me,  the  way  of  truth  is  to  come  through  the  know- 
ledge of  my  ignorance  to  the  submissiveness  of 
faith,  and  then,  making  that  my  starting  place,  to 
raise  my  knowledge  into  faith."  ^ 

Lest  this  proclamation  of  mystery  should  seem 
alarming,  let  us  add  that  this  mystery  also  is  scien- 

* Beck  : “ Bib.  Psychol.,”  Clark’s  Tr.,  Pref , 2nd  Ed.  p.  xiii. 


INTRO  D UCTION. 


29 


tific.  The  one  subject  on  which  all  scientific  men 
are  agreed,  the  one  theme  on  which  all  alike  become 
eloquent,  the  one  strain  of  pathos  in  all  their  writing 
and  speaking  and  thinking,  concerns  that  final  uii>- 
certainty,  that  utter  blackness  of  darkness  bound- 
ing their  work  on  every  side.  If  the  light  of  Nature 
is  to  illuminate  for  us  the  Spiritual  Sphere,  there  may 
well  be  a black  Unknown,  corresponding,  at  least 
at  some  points,  to  this  zone  of  darkness  round  the 
Natural  World. 

But  the  final  gain  would  appear  in  the  department 
of  Theology.  The  establishment  of  the  Spiritual 
Laws  on  ‘‘the  solid  ground  of  Nature,’^  to  which  the 
mind  trusts  “which  builds  for  aye,’’  would  offer 
a new  basis  for  certainty  in  Religion.  It  has  been 
indicated  that  the  authority  of  Authority  is  waning. 
This  is  a plain  fact  And  it  was  inevitable. 
Authority — man’s  Authority,  that  is — is  for  children. 
And  there  necessarily  comes  a time  when  they  add 
to  the  question,  What  shall  I do  ? or.  What  shall 
I believe?  the  adult’s  interrogation — Why?  Now 
this  question  is  sacred,  and  must  be  answered. 

“ How  truly  its  central  position  is  impregnable,” 
Herbert  Spencer  has  well  discerned,  “ religion  hag 
never  adequately  realized.  In  the  devoutest  faitli, 
as  we  habitually  see  it,  there  lies'  hidden  an  inner- 
most core  of  scepticism  ; and  it  is  this  scepticism 


INTRODUCTION, 


which  causes  that  dread  of  inquiry  displayed  by 
religion  when  face  to  face  with  science.”  ^ True 
indeed  ; Religion  has  never  realized  how  impregnable 
are  many  of  its  positions.  It  has  not  yet  been  placed 
on  that  basis  which  would  make  them  impregnable. 
And  in  a transition  period  like  the  present,  holding 
Authority  with  one  hand,  the  other  feeling  all 
around  in  the  darkness  for  some  strong  new  support, 
Theology  is  surely  to  be  pitied.  Whence  this  dread 
when  brought  face  to  face  with  Science  ? It  cannot 
be  dread  of  scientific  fact.  No  single  fact  in  Science 
has  ever  discredited  a fact  in  Religion.  The 
theologian  knows  that,  and  admits  that  he  has  no 
fear  of  facts.  What  then  has  Science  done  to  make 
Theology  tremble  ? It  is  its  method.  It  is  its 
system.  It  is  its  Reign  of  Law.  It  is  its  harmony 
and  continuity.  The  attack  is  not  specific.  No  one 
point  is  assailed.  It  is  the  whole  system  which 
when  compared  with  the  other  and  weighed  in  its 
balance  is  found  wanting.  An  eye  which  has  looked 
at  the  first  cannot  look  upon  this.  To  do  that,  and 
rest  in  the  contemplation,  it  has  first  to  uncentury 
itself. 

Herbert  Spencer  points  out  further,  with  how 
much  truth  need  not  now  be  discussed,  that  the 


* “First  Principles,"  p,  i6i 


INTRODUCTION, 


31 

purification  of  Religion  has  always  come  from 
Science.  It  is  very  apparent  at  all  events  that  an 
immense  debt  must  soon  be  contracted.  The  shift- 
ing of  the  furnishings  will  be  a work  of  time.  But 
it  must  be  accomplished.  And  not  the  least  result 
of  the  process  will  be  the  effect  upon  Science  itself. 
No  department  of  knowledge  ever  contributes  to 
another  without  receiving  its  own  again  with  usury 
— witness  the  reciprocal  favours  of  Biology  and 
Sociology,  From  the  time  that  Comte  defined  the 
analogy  between  the  phenomena  exhibited  by 
aggregations  of  associated  men  and  those  of  animal 
colonies,  the  Science  of  Life  and  the  Science  of 
Society  have  been  so  contributing  to  one  another 
that  their  progress  since  has  been  all  but  hand-in- 
hand. A conception  borrowed  by  the  one  has  been 
observed  in  time  finding  its  way  back,  and  always  in 
an  enlarged  form,  to  further  illuminate  and  enrich 
the  field  it  left.  So  must  it  be  with  Science  and 
Religiono  If  the  purification  of  Religion  comes  from 
Science,  the  purification  of  Science,  in  a deeper 
sense,  shall  come  from  Religion,  The  true  ministry 
of  Nature  must  at  last  be  honoured,  and  Science 
take  its  place  as  the  great  expositor.  To  Men  ol 
Science,  not  less  than  to  Theologians, 

“ Science  then 
Shall  be  a precious  visitant ; and  then, 


3* 


INTRODUCTION. 


And  only  then,  be  worthy  of  her  name  ; 

For  then  her  heart  shall  kindle,  her  dull  eye, 

Dull  and  inanimate,  no  more  shall  hang 
Chained  to  its  object  in  brute  slavery  ; 

But  taught  with  patient  interest  to  watch 
The  process  of  things,  and  serve  the  cause 
Of  order  and  distinctness,  not  for  this 
Shall  it  forget  that  its  most  noble  use, 

Its  most  illustrious  province,  must  be  found 
In  furnishing  clear  guidance,  a support, 

Not  treacherous,  to  the  mind’s  excursive  power/ 

But  the  gift  of  Science  to  Theology  shall  be  not 
less  rich.  With  the  inspiration  of  Nature  to  illu- 
minate what  the  inspiration  of  Revelation  has  left 
obscure,  heresy  in  certain  whole  departments  shall 
become  impossible.  With  the  demonstration  of  the 
naturalness  of  the  supernatural,  scepticism  even  may 
come  to  be  regarded  as  unscientific.  And  those 
who  have  wrestled  long  for  a few  bare  truths  to 
ennoble  li'e  and  rest  their  souls  in  thinking  of  the 
future  \^dl  not  be  left  in  doubt. 

It  is  impossible  to  believe  that  the  amazing  suc- 
cession of  revelations  in  the  domain  of  Nature  during 
the  last  few  centuries,  at  which  the  world  has  all  but 
grown  tired  wondering,  are  to  yield  nothing  for 
the  higher  life.  If  the  development  of  doctrine  is 
to  have  any  meaning  for  the  future,  Theology  must 


^ Wordsworth’s  Excursion,  Book  iv. 


INTRODUCTION. 


33 


draw  upon  the  further  revelation  of  the  seen  for  the 
further  revelation  of  the  unseen.  It  need,  and  can, 
add  nothing  to  fact ; but  as  the  vision  of  Newton 
rested  on  a clearer  and  richer  world  than  that  ol 
Plato,  so,  though  seeing  the  same  things  in  the  Spi- 
ritual World  as  our  fathers,  we  may  see  them  clearer 
and  richer.  With  the  work  of  the  centurfes  upon  it, 
the  mental  eye  is  a finer  instrument,  and  demands  a 
more  ordered  world.  Had  the  revelation  of  Law 
been  given  sooner,  it  had  been  unintelligible.  Re- 
velation never  volunteers  anything  that  man  could 
discover  for  himself — on  the  principle,  probably,  that 
it  is  only  when  he  is  capable  of  discovering  it  that 
he  is  capable  of  appreciating  it.  Besides,  children 
do  not  need  Laws,  except  Laws  in  the  sense  of  com- 
mandments. They  repose  with  simplicity  on  author- 
ity, and  ask  no  questions.  But  there  comes  a time, 
as  the  world  reaches  its  manhood,  when  they  will  ask 
questions,  and  stake,  moreover,  everything  on  the 
answers.  That  time  is  now.  Hence  we  must  ex- 
hibit our  doctrines,  not  lying  athwart  the  lines  of  the 
woild’s  thinking,  in  a place  reserved,  and  therefore 
shunned,  for  the  Great  Exception  ; but  in  their  kin- 
ship to  all  truth  and  in  their  Law-relation  to  the  whole 
of  Nature.  This  is,  indeed,  simply  following  out  the 
system  of  teaching  begun  by  Christ  Himself.  And 
what  is  the  search  for  spiritual  truth  in  the  Laws  ol 


D 


34 


INTRODUCTION. 


Nature  but  an  attempt  to  utter  the  parables  which 
have  been  hid  so  long  in  th/^  world  around  without  a 
preacher,  and  to  tell  men  once  more  that  the  King 
dana  uf  Heaven  is  like  unto  this  and  to  that? 


PART  n. 


The  Lav/  of  Continuity  having  been  referred  to 
already  as  a prominent  factor  in  this  inquiry,  it  may 
not  be  out  of  place  to  sustain  the  plea  for  Natural 
Law  in  the  Spiritual  Sphere  by  a brief  statement 
and  application  of  this  great  principle.  The  Law 
of  Continuity  furnishes  an  a-priori  argument  for  the 
position  we  are  attempting  to  establish  of  the  most 
convincing  kind — of  such  a kind,  indeed,  as  to  seem 
to  our  mind  final.  Briefly  indicated,  the  ground 
taken  up  is  this,  that  if  Nature  be  a harmony,  Man 
in  all  his  relations — physical,  mental,  moral,  and 
spiritual — falls  to  be  included  within  its  circle.  It  is 
altogether  unlikely  that  man  spiritual  should  be  vio- 
lently separated  in  all  the  conditions  of  growth,  de- 
velopment, and  life,  from  man  physical.  It  is  indeed 
difficult  to  conceive  that  one  set  of  principles  should 
guide  the  natural  life,  and  these  at  a certain  period — 
the  very  point  where  they  are  needed — suddenly  give 
place  to  another  set  of  principles  altogether  new  and 


INTRODUCTION, 


unrelated.  Nature  has  never  taught  us  to  expect 
such  a catastrophe.  She  has  nowhere  prepared  us 
for  it.  And  Man  cannot  in  the  nature  of  thin 
the  nature  of  thought,  in  the  nature  of  lang 
separated  into  two  such  incoherent  halves. 

The  spiritual  man,  it  is  true,  is  to  be  studied  in 
different  department  of  science  from  the  natural 
man.  But  the  harmony  established  by  science  is 
not  a harmony  within  specific  departments.  It  is 
the  universe  that  is  the  harmony,  the  universe  of 
which  these  are  but  parts.  And  the  harmonies  of 
the  parts  depend  for  all  their  weight  and  interest  on 
the  harmony  of  the  whole.  While,  therefore,  there 
are  many  harmonies,  there  is  but  one  harmony.  The 
breaking  up  of  the  phenomena  of  the  universe  into 
carefully  guarded  groups,  and  the  allocation  of  cer- 
tain prominent  Laws  to  each,  it  must  never  be  for- 
gotten, and  however  much  Nature  lends  herself  to  it, 
are  artificial.  We  find  an  evolution  in  Botany,  another 
in  Geology,  and  another  in  Astronomy,  and  the  effect 
is  to  lead  one  insensibly  to  look  upon  these  as  three 
distinct  evolutions.  But  these  sciences,  of  course, 
are  mere  departments  created  by  ourselves  to  facili* 
tate  knowledge — reductions  of  Nature  to  the  scale 
of  o^r  own  intelligence.  And  we  must  beware  of 
breaking  up  Nature  except  for  this  purpose.  Science 
has  so  dissected  everything,  that  it  becomes  a 


INTRODUCTION, 


37 


mental  difficulty  to  put  the  puzzle  together  again  ; 
and  vve  must  keep  ourselves  in  practice  by  constantly 
•■^'inking  of  Nature  as  a whole,  if  science  is  not  to 
dWd  by  its  own  refinements.  Evolution  being 
in  so  many  different  sciences,  the  likelihood  is 
-xdt  it  is  a universal  principle.  And  there  is  no  pre- 
sumption whatever  against  this  Law  and  many  others 
being  excluded  from  the  domain  of  the  spiritual  life. 
On  the  other  hand,  there  are  very  convincing  reasons 
why  the  Natural  Laws  should  be  continuous  through 
the  Spiritual  Sphere — not  changed  in  any  way  to 
meet  the  new  circumstances,  but  continuous  as  they 
stand. 

But  to  the  exposition.  One  of  the  most  striking 
generalisations  of  recent  science  is  that  even  Laws 
have  their  Law.  Phenomena  first,  in  the  progress 
of  knowledge,  were  grouped  together,  and  Nature 
shortly  presented  the  spectacle  of  a cosmos,  the  lines 
of  beauty  being  the  great  Natural  Laws.  So  long, 
however,  as  these  Laws  were  merely  great  lines  run- 
ning through  Nature,  so  Ibng  as  they  remained  isolated 
from  one  another,  the  system  of  Nature  was  still 
incomplete.  The  principle  which  sought  Law  among 
phenomena  had  to  go  further  and  seek  a Law  among 
the  Laws.  Laws  themselves  accordingly  came  to  be 
treated  as  they  treated  phenomena,  and  found  them- 
selves finally  grouped  in  a still  narrower  circle.  That 


INTRODUCTION. 


58 

inmost  circle  is  governed  by  one  great  Law,  the  Law 
of  Continuity.  It  is  the  Law  for  Laws. 

It  is  perhaps  significant  that  few  exact  definition? 
of  Continuity  are  to  be  found.  Even  in  Sir  W.  R. 
Grovers  famous  paper, ^ the  fountain-head  of  the 
modern  form  of  this  far  from  modern  truth,  there  is 
no  attempt  at  definition.  In  point  of  fact,  its  sweep 
is  so  magnificent,  it  appeals  so  much  more  to  the 
imagination  than  to  the  reason,  that  men  have  pre- 
ferred to  exhibit  rather  than  to  define  it  Its  true 
greatness  consists  in  the  final  impression  it  leaves  on 
the  mind  with  regard  to  the  uniformity  of  Nature. 
For  it  was  reserved  for  the  Law  of  Continuity  to 
put  the  finishing  touch  to  the  harmony  of  the  uni- 
verse. 

Probably  the  most  satisfactory  way  to  secure  for 
oneself  a just  appreciation  of  the  Principle  of  Con- 
tinuity is  to  try  to  conceive  the  universe  without  it 
The  opposite  of  a continuous  universe  would  be  a 
discontinuous  universe,  an  incoherent  and  irrelevant 
universe — as  irrelevant  in  all  its  ways  of  doing  things 
as  an  irrelevant  person.  In  effect,  to  withdraw  Con- 
tinuity from  the  universe  would  be  the  same  as  to 
withdraw  reason  from  an  individual.  The  universe 
would  run  deranged  ; the  world  would  be  a mad 
world. 

* **The  Correlation  of  Physical  Forces,”  6th  ed.,  p.  181  et  siq. 


//Production. 


39 


There  used  to  be  a children's  book  which  bore 
the  fascinating  title  of  “The  Chance  World."  It 
described  a world  in  which  everything  happened  by 
chance.  The  sun  might  rise  or  it  might  not ; or  it 
might  appear  at  any  hour,  or  the  moon  might  come 
up  instead.  When  children  were  born  they  might 
have  one  head  or  a dozen  heads,  and  those  heads 
might  not  be  on  their  shoulders — there  might  be  no 
shoulders — but  arranged  about  the  limbs.  If  one 
jumped  up  in  the  air  it  was  impossible  to  predict 
whether  he  would  ever  come  down  again.  That  he 
came  down  yesterday  was  no  guarantee  that  he 
would  do  it  next  time.  For  every  day  antecedent 
and  consequent  varied,  and  gravitation  and  every- 
thing else  changed  from  hour  to  hour.  To-day  a 
child's  body  might  be  so  light  that  it  was  impossible 
for  it  to  descend  from  its  chair  to  the  floor ; but  to- 
morrow, in  attempting  the  experiment  again,  the 
impetus  might  drive  it  through  a three-storey  house 
and  dash  it  to  pieces  somewhere  near  the  centre  of 
the  earth.  In  this  chance  world  cause  and  effect 
were  abolished.  Law  was  annihilated.  And  the 
result  to  the  inhabitants  of  such  a world  could  only 
be  that  reason  would  be  impossible.  It  would  be  a 
lunatic  world  with  a population  of  lunatics. 

Now  this  is  no  more  than  a real  picture  of  what 
the  world  would  be  without  Law,  or  the  universe 


40 


INTRODUCTfON. 


w’ithout  Continuity.  And  hence  vve  come  in  sight  ol 
the  necessity  of  some  principle  or  Law  acccrding  to 
which  Laws  shall  be,  and  be  “ continuous throughout 
the  system.  Man  as  a rational  and  moral  being 
demands  a pledge  that  if  he  depends  on  Nature  for 
any  given  result  on  the  ground  that  Nature  has 
previously  led  him  to  expect  such  a result,  his 
intellect  shall  not  be  insulted,  nor  his  confidence  in 
her  abused.  If  he  is  to  trust  Nature,  in  short,  it  must 
be  guaranteed  to  him  that  in  doing  so  he  will 

never  be  put  to  confusion.”  The  authors  of  the 
Unseen  Universe  conclude  their  examination  of  this 
principle  by  saying  that  ‘‘  assuming  the  existence  of 
a supreme  Governor  of  the  universe,  the  Principle 
of  Continuity  may  be  said  to  be  the  definite  expres- 
sion in  words  of  our  trust  that  He  will  not  put  us 
to  permanent  intellectual  confusion,  and  we  can 
easily  conceive  similar  expressions  of  trust  with 
reference  to  the  other  faculties  of  man.”^  Or,  as 
it  has  been  well  put  elsewhere.  Continuity  is  the 
expression  of  the  Divine  Veracity  in  Nature.”^  The 
most  striking  examples  of  the  continuousness  of 
Law  are  perhaps  those  furnished  by  Astronomy, 
especially  in  connection  with  the  more  recent  appli- 

' Unseen  Universe,”  6th  ed.,  p.  88. 

^ “Old  Faiths  in  New  Light,”  by  Newman  Smith.  Unwinds 
English  edition,  p.  252. 


V 


INTRODUCTION.  4* 

cations  of  spectrum  analysis.  But  even  in  the  case 
of  the  simpler  Laws  the  demonstration  is  complete. 
There  is  no  reason  apart  from  Continuity  to  expect 
that  gravitation  for  instance  should  prevail  outside 
our  world.  But  wherever  matter  has  been  detected 

< 

throughout  the  entire  universe,  whether  in  the  form 
of  star  or  planet,  comet  or  meteorite,  it  is  found  to 
obey  that  Law.  If  there  were  no  other  indication 
of  unity  than  this,  it  would  be  almost  enough.  For 
the  unity  which  is  implied  in  the  mechanism  of  the 
heavens  is  indeed  a unity  which  is  all-embracing  and 
complete.  The  structure  of  our  own  bodies,  with  ail 
that  depends  upon  it,  is  a structure  governed  by, 
and  therefore  adapted  to,  the  same  force  of  gravita- 
tion which  has  determined  the  form  and  the  move- 
ments of  myriads  of  worlds.  Every  part  of  the 
human  organism  is  fitted  to  conditions  which  would 
all  be  destroyed  in  a moment  if  the  forces  of  gravita- 
tion were  to  change  or  fail.”  ^ 

But  it  is  unnecessary  to  multiply  illustrations. 
Having  defined  the  principle  we  may  proceed  at 
once  to  apply  it.  And  the  argument  may  be 
summed  up  in  a sentence.  As  the  Natural  Laws  are 
continuous  through  the  universe  of  matter  and  of 

* The  Duke  of  Argyll : Contemporary  Review^  Sept.,  1880, 
P-  3SB 


42 


INTRODUCTION, 


space,  so  will  they  be  continuous  through  the 
universe  of  spirit. 

If  this  be  denied,  what  then  ? Those  who  deny  it 
must  furnish  the  disproof.  The  argument  is  founded 
on  a principle  which  is  now  acknowledged  to  be 
universal ; and  the  onus  of  disproof  must  lie  with 
those  who  maybe  bold  enough  to  take  up  the  position 
that  a region  exists  where  at  last  the  Principle  of 
Continuity  fails.  To  do  this  one  would  first  have 
to  overturn  Nature,  then  science,  and  last,  the  human 
mind. 

It  may  seem  an  obvious  objection  that  many  of 
the  Natural  Laws  have  no  connection  whatever  with 
the  Spiritual  World,  and  as  a matter  of  fact  are  not 
continued  through  it.  Gravitation  for  instance — what 
direct  application  has  that  in  the  Spiritual  World  ? 
The  reply  is  threefold.  First,  there  is  no  proof  that 
it  does  not  hold  there.  If  the  .spirit  be  in  any  sense 
material  it  certainly  must  hold.  In  the  second  place, 
gravitation  may  hold  for  the  Spiritual  Sphere  al* 
though  it  cannot  be  directly  proved.  The  spirit 
may  be  armed  with  powers  which  enable  it  to  rise 
superior  to  gravity.  During  the  action  of  these 
powers  gravity  need  be  no  more  suspended  than  in 
the  case  of  a plant  which  rises  in  the  air  during  the 
process  of  growth.  It  does  this  in  virtue  of  a highei 
Law  and  in  apparent  defiance  of  the  lower.  Thirdly^ 


INTRODUCTION. 


4^ 


if  the  spiritual  be  not  material  it  still  cannot  be  said 
tliat  gravitation  ceases  at  that  point  to  be  continuous. 
It  is  not  gravitation  that  ceases — it  is  matter. 

This  point,  however,  will  require  development  for 
another  reason.  In  the  case  of  the  plant  just  referred 
to,  there  is  a principle  of  growth  or  vitality  at  work 
superseding  the  attraction  of  gravity.  Why  is  there 
no  trace  of  that  Law  in  the  Inorganic  world  } Is  not 
this  another  instance  of  the  discontinuousness  of 
Law  ? If  the  Law  of  vitality  has  so  little  connection 
with  the  Inorganic  kingdom — less  even  than  gravi- 
tation with  the  Spiritual,  what  becomes  of  Con- 
tinuity ? Is  it  not  evident  that  each  kingdom  of 
Nature  has  its  own  set  of  Laws  which  continue 
possibly  untouched  for  the  specific  kingdom  but 
never  extend  beyond  it  ? 

It  is  quite  true  that  when  we  pass  from  the  In- 
organic to  the  Organic,  we  come  upon  a new  set  of 
Laws.  But  the  reason  why  the  lower  set  do  not  seem 
to  act  in  the  higher  sphere  is  not  that  they  are  anni- 
hilated, but  that  they  are  overruled.  And  the  reason 
why  the  higher  Laws  are  not  found  operating  in  the 
lower  is  not  because  they  are  not  continuous  down- 
wards, but  because  there  is  nothing  for  them  there  to 
act  upon.  It  is  not  Law  that  fails,  but  opportunity. 
The  biological  Laws  are  continuous  for  life.  Wher- 
ever there  is  life,  th'\t  is  to  say,  they  will  be  found 


INTRODUCTION. 


«4 

acting,  just  as  gravitation  acts  wherever  there  is 
matter. 

We  have  purposely,  in  the  last  paragraph,  indulged 
in  a fallacy.  We  have  said  that  the  biological  Laws 
would  certainly  be  continuous  in  the  lower  or  mineral 
sphere  were  there  anything  there  for  them  to  act 
upon.  Now  Laws  do  not  act  upon  anything.  It  has 
been  stated  already,  although  apparently  it  cannot 
be  too  abundantly  emphasized,  that  Laws  are  only 
modes  of  operation,  not  themselves  operators.  The 
accurate  statement,  therefore,  would  be  that  the 
biological  Laws  would  be  continuous  in  the  lower 
sphere  were  there  anything  there  for  them,  not  to  act 
upon,  but  to  keep  in  order.  If  there  is  no  acting 
going  on,  if  there  is  nothing  being  kept  in  order,  the 
responsibility  does  not  lie  with  Continuity.  The  Law 
will  always  be  at  its  post,  not  only  when  its  services 
are  required,  but  wherever  they  are  possible. 

Attention  is  drawn  to  this,  for  it  is  a correction 
one  will  find  oneself  compelled  often  to  make  in  his 
thinking.  It  is  so  difficult  to  keep  out  of  mind  the 
idea  of  substance  in  connection  with  the  Natural 
Laws,  the  idea  that  they  are  the  movers,  the  essences, 
the  energies,  that  one  is  constantly  on  the  verge 
of  falling  into  false  conclusions.  Thus  a hasty 
glance  at  the  present  argument  on  the  part  of  any 
one  ill-furnished  enough  to  confound  Law  with  sub- 


INTRODUCTION, 


45 


stance  or  with  cause  would  probably  lead  to  its 
immediate  rejection. 

For,  to  continue  the  same  line  of  illustration,  it 
might  next  be  urged  that  such  a Law  as  Biogenesis, 
which,  as  we  hope  to  show  afterwards,  is  the  funda- 
mental Law  of  life  for  both  the  natural  and  spiritual 
worlds,  can  have  no  application  whatsoever  in  the 
latter  sphere.  The  life  with  which  it  deals  in  the 
Natural  World  does  not  enter  at  all  into  the  Spiritual 
World,  and  therefore,  it  might  be  argued,  the  Law  of 
Biogenesis  cannot  be  capable  of  extension  into  it. 
The  Law  of  Continuity  seems  to  be  snapped  at  the 
point  where  the  natural  passes  into  the  spiritual 
The  vital  principle  of  the  body  is  a different  thing 
from  the  vital  principle  of  the  spiritual  life.  Bio- 
genesis deals  with  with  the  natural  life,  with 

cells  and  germs,  and  as  there  are  no  exactly  similar 
cells  and  germs  in  the  Spiritual  World,  the  Law  can- 
not therefore  apply.  All  which  is  as  true  as  if  one 
were  to  say  that  the  fifth  proposition  of  the  First 
Book  of  Euclid  applies  when  the  figures  are  drawn 
with  chalk  upon  a blackboard,  but  fails  with  regard 
to  structures  of  wood  or  stone. 

The  proposition  is  continuous  for  the  whole  world, 
and,  doubtless,  likewise  for  the  sun  and  moon  and 
stars.  The  same  universality  may  be  predicated 
likewise  for  the  Law  of  life.  Wherever  there  is  life  we 


0 


INTRODUCTION. 


may  expect  to  find  it  arranged,  ordered,  governed 
according  to  the  same  Law,  At  the  beginning  of  the 
natural  life  we  find  the  Law  that  natural  life  can  only 
come  from  pre-existing  natural  life ; and  at  the  be- 
ginning of  the  spiritual  life  we  find  that  the  spfritual 
life  can  only  come  from  pre-existing  spiritual  life. 
But  there  are  not  two  Laws  ; there  is  one — Bio- 
genesis. At  one  end  the  Law  is  dealing  with  matter, 
at  the  other  with  spirit.  The  qualitative  terms 
natural  and  spiritual  make  no  difference.  Biogenesis 
is  the  Law  for  all  life  and  for  all  kinds  of  life,  and 
the  particular  substance  with  which  it  is  associated 
is  as  indifferent  to  Biogenesis  as  it  is  to  Gravitation. 
Gravitation  will  act  whether  the  substance  be  suns 
and  stars,  or  grains  of  sand,  or  raindrops.  Bio- 
genesis, in  like  manner,  will  act  wherever  there  is 
life. 

The  conclusion  finally  is,  that  from  the  nature  of 
Law  in  general,  and  from  the  scope  of  the  Principle 
of  Continuity  in  particular,  the  Laws  of  the  natural 
life  must  be  those  of  the  spiritual  life.  This  does  not 
exclude,  observe,  the  possibility  of  there  being  new 
Law'5  in  addition  within  the  Spiritual  Sphere;  nor 
does  it  even  include  the  supposition  that  the  old  I^ws 
will  be  the  conspicuous  Laws  of  the  Spiritual  World, 
both  which  ooints  will  be  dealt  with  presently.  It 
simply  asserts  that  whatever  else  may  be  found, 


INTRODUCTION. 


47 


these  must  be  found  there  ; that  they  must  be  there 
though  they  may  not  be  seen  there  ; and  that  they 
must  project  beyond  there  if  there  be  anything 
beyond  there.  If  the  Law  of  Continuity  is  true,  the 
only  way  to  escape  the  conclusion  that  the  Laws  of 
the  natural  life  are  the  Laws,  or  at  least  are  Laws,  of 
the  spiritual  • life,  is  to  say  that  there  is  no  spiritual 
life.  It  is  really  easier  to  give  up  the  phenomena 
than  to  give  up  the  Law.  ' 

Two  questions  now  remain  for  further  considera- 
tion— one  bearing  on  the  possibility  of  new  Law  in 
the  spiritual ; the  other,  on  the  assumed  invisibility 
or  inconspicuousness  of  the  old  Laws  on  account  of 
their  subordination  to  the  new. 

Let  us  begin  by  conceding  that  there  may  be  new 
Laws.  The  argument  might  then  be  advanced  that 
since,  in  Nature  generally,  we  come  upon  new  Laws 
as  we  pass  from  lower  to  higher  kingdoms,  the  old 
still  remaining  in  force,  the  newer  Laws  which  one 
would  expect  to  meet  in  the  Spiritual  World  would 
so  transcend  and  overwhelm  the  older  as  to  make  the 
analogy  or  identity,  even  if  traced,  of  no  practical 
use.  The  new  Laws  would  represent  operations  and 
energies  so  different,  and  so  much  more  elevated, 
that  they  would  afford  the  true  keys  to  the  Spiritual 
World.  As  Gravitation  is  practically  lost  sight  of 
when  we  pass  into  the  domain  of  life,  so  Biogenesis 


4^ 


LNTROD  UCTION. 


would  be  lost  sight  of  as  we  enter  the  Spiritual 
Sphere, 

We  must  first  separate  in  this  statement  the  old 
confusion  of  Law  and  energy.  Gravitation  is  not  lost 
sight  of  in  the  organic  world.  Gravity  may  be,  to  a 
certain  extent,  but  not  Gravitation  ; and  gravity  only 
where  a higher  power  counteracts  its  action.  At 
the  same  time  it  is  not  to  be  denied  that  the  con- 
spicuous thing  in  Organic  Nature  is  not  the  great 
Inorganic  Law. 

But  the  objection  turns  upon  the  statement  that 
reasoning  from  analogy  we  should  expect,  in  turn,  to 
lose  sight  of  Biogenesis  as  we  enter  the  Spiritual 
Sphere.  One  answer  to  which  is  that,  as  a matter  of 
fact,  we  do  not  lose  sight  of  it.  So  far  from  being  in- 
visible, it  lies  across  the  very  threshold  of  the  Spiritual 
World,  and,  as  we  shall  see,  pervades  it  everywhere. 
What  we  lose  sight  of,  to  a certain  extent,  is  the 
natural  ^109.  In  the  Spiritual  World  that  is  not  the 
conspicuous  thing,  and  it  is  obscure  there  just  as 
gravity  becomes  obscure  in  the  Organic,  because 
something  higher,  more  potent,  more  characteristic  of 
the  higher  plane,  comes  in.  That  there  are  higher 
energies,  so  to  speak,  in  the  Spiritual  World  is,  of 
course,  to  be  affirmed  alike  on  the  ground  of  analogy 
and  of  experience  ; but  it  does  not  follow  that  these 
necessitate  other  Laws.  A Law  has  nothing  to  do 


INTRODUCTION, 


49 


with  potency.  We  may  lose  sight  of  a substance, 
or  of  an  energy,  but  it  is  an  abuse  of  language  to 
talk  of  losing  sight  of  Laws. 

Aro  there,  then,  no  other  Laws  in  the  Spiritual 
World  except  those  which  are  the  projections  or 
extensions  of  Natural  Laws?  From  the  number  of 
Natural  Laws  which  are  found  in  the  higher  sphere, 
from  the  large  territory  actually  embraced  by  them, 
and  from  their  special  prominence  throughout  the 
whole  region,  it  may  at  least  be  answered  that  the 
margin  left  for  them  is  small.  But  if  the  objection 
is  pressed  that  it  is  contrary  to  the  analogy,  and 
unreasonable  in  itself,  that  there  should  not  be  new 
Laws  for  this  higher  sphere,  the  reply  is  obvious.  Let 
these  Laws  be  produced.  If  the  spiritual  nature,  in 
inception,  growth,  and  development,  does  not  follow 
natural  principles,  let  the  true  principles  be  stated 
and  explained.  We  have  not  denied  that  there  may 
be  new  Laws.  One  would  almost  be  surprised  if  there 
were  not.  The  mass  of  material  handed  over  from 
the  natural  to  the  spiritual,  continuous,  apparently, 
from  the  natural  to  the  spiritual,  is  so  great  that  till 
that  is  worked  out  it  will  be  impossible  to  say  what 
space  is  still  left  unembraced  by  Laws  that  are  known. 
At  present  it  is  impossible  even  approximately  to 
estimate  the  size  of  that  supposed  terra  incognita. 
From  one  point  of  view  it  ought  to  be  vast,  from 


£ 


INTRODUCTION. 


another  extremely  small.  But  however  large  the 
region  governed  by  the  suspected  new  Laws  may  be 
that  cannot  diminish  by  a hair’s-breadth  the  size  of 
the  territory  where  the  old  Laws  still  prevail.  That 
territory  itself,  relatively  to  us  though  perhaps  not 
absolutely,  must  be  of  great  extent.  The  size  of  the 
key  which  is  to  open  it,  that  is,  the  size  of  all  the 
Natural  Laws  which  can  be  found  to  apply,  is  a guar- 
antee that  the  region  of  the  knowable  in  the  Spiritual 
World  is  at  least  as  wide  as  these  regions  of  the 
Natural  World  which  by  the  help  of  these  Laws  have 
been  explored.  No  doubt  also  there  yet  remain 
some  Natural  Laws  to  be  discovered,  and  these  in 
time  may  have  a further  light  to  shed  on  the  spiritual 
field.  Then  we  may  know  all  that  is.^  By  no 
means.  We  may  only  know  all  that  may  be  known. 
And  that  may  be  very  little.  The  Sovereign  Will 
which  sways  the  sceptre  of  that  invisible  empire 
must  be  granted  a right  of  freedom — that  freedom 
which  by  putting  it  into  our  wills  He  surely  teaches 
us  to  honour  in  His.  In  much  of  His  dealing  with 
ns  also,  in  what  may  be  called  the  paternal  relation, 
there  may  seem  no  special  Law — no  Law  except  the 
highest  of  all,  that  Law  of  which  all  other  Laws  are 
parts,  that  Law  which  neither  Nature  can  wholly  reflect 
nor  the  mind  begin  to  fathom — the  Law  of  Love.  He 
adds  nothing  to  that,  however,  who  loses  sight  of  all 


INTRODUCTION. 


other  Laws  in  that,  nor  does  he  take  from  it  who  finds 
specific  Laws  everywhere  radiating  from  it. 

With  regard  to  the  supposed  new  Laws  of  the 
Spiritual  World — those  Laws,  that  is,  which  are  found 
for  the  first  time  in  the  Spiritual  World,  and  have  no 
analogies  lower  down — there  is  this  to  be  said,  that 
there  is  one  strong  reason  against  exaggerating  either 
their  number  or  importance — ^their  importance  at  least 
for  our  immediate  needs.  The  connection  between 
language  and  the  Law  of  Continuity  has  been  referred 
to  incidentally  already.  It  is  clear  that  we  can  only 
express  the  Spiritual  Laws  in  language  borrowed  from 
the  visible  universe.  Being  dependent  for  our  vocab- 
ulary on  images,  if  an  altogether  new  and  foreign  set 
of  Laws  existed  in  the  Spiritual  World,  they  could 
never  take  shape  as  definite  ideas  from  mere  want 
of  words.  The  hypothetical  new  Laws  which  may 
remain  to  be  discovered  in  the  domain  of  Natural  or 
Mental  Science  may  afford  some  index  of  these  hypo- 
thetical higher  Laws,  but  this  would  of  course  mean 
that  the  latter  were  no  longer  foreign  but  in  analogy, 
or,  likelier  still,  identical.  If,  on  the  other  hand,  the 
Vatural  Laws  of  the  future  have  nothing  to  say  of 
These  higher  Laws,  what  can  be  said  of  them } 
Where  is  the  language  to  come  from  in  which  to 
frame  them  ? If  their  disclosure  could  be  of  any 
practical  use  to  us,  we  may  be  sure  the  clue  to  them, 


U.  OF  iLL.  ub. 


5*  . 


INTRODUCTION. 


the  revelation  of  them,  in  some  way  would  have  been 
put  into  Nature.  If,  on  the  contrary,  they  are  not  to  be 
of  immediate  use  to  man,  it  is  better  they  should  not 
embarrass  him.  After  all,  then,  our  knowledge  of 
higher  Law  must  be  limited  by  our  knowledge  of  the 
lower.  The  Natural  Laws  as  at  present  known,  what- 
ever additions  may  yet  be  made  to  them,  give  a fair 
rendering  of  the  facts  of  Nature.  And  their  ana- 
logies or  their  projections  in  the  Spiritual  sphere  may 
also  be  said  to  offer  a fair  account  of  that  sphere,  or 
of  one  or  two  conspicuous  departments  of  it.  The 
time  has  come  for  that  account  to  be  given.  The 
greatest  among  the  theological  Laws  are  the  Laws 
of  Nature  in  disguise.  It  will  be  the  splendid  task 

m 

of  the  theology  of  the  future  to  take  off  the  mask 
and  disclose  to  a waning  scepticism  the  naturalness 
of  the  supernatural. 

It  is  almost  singular  that  the  identification  of  the 
Laws  of  the  Spiritual  World  with  the  Laws  of  Nature 
should  so  long  have  escaped  recognition.  For  apart 
from  the  probability  on  d priori  grounds,  it  is  in- 
volved in  the  whole  structure  of  Paiable.  When 
any  two  Phenomena  in  the  two  spheres  are  seen  to 
be  analogous,  the  parallelism  must  depend  upon  the 
fact  that  the  Laws  governing  them  are  not  analogous 
but  identical.  And  yet  this  basis  for  Parable  seems 
to  have  been  overlooked.  Thus  Principal  Shairp 


INTRODUCTION. 


53 


This  seeing  of  Spiritual  truths  n:\irrored  in  the  face 
of  Nature  rests  not  on  any  fancied,  but  in  a real 
analogy  between  the  natural  and  the  spiritual  worlds, 
They  are  in  some  sense  which  science  has  not  ascer* 
tainedy  but  which  the  vital  and  religious  imagination 
can  perceive,  counterparts  one  of  the  other.”  ^ But 
is  not  this  the  explanation,  that  parallel  Phenomena 
depend  upon  identical  Laws } It  is  a question  in- 
deed whether  one  can  speak  of  Laws  at  all  as  being 
analogous.  Phenomena  are  parallel.  Laws  which 
make  them  so  are  themselves  one. 

In  discussing  the  relations  of  the  Natural  and  Spiri- 
tual kingdom,  it  has  been  all  but  implied  hitherto 
that  the  Spiritual  Laws  were  framed  originally  on 
the  plan  of  the  Natural ; and  the  impression  one 
might  receive  in  studying  the  two  worlds  for  the  first 
time  from  the  side  of  analogy  would  naturally  be 
that  the  lower  world  was  formed  first,  as  a kind  of 
scaffolding  on  which  the  higher  and  Spiritual  should 
be  afterwards  raised.  Now  the  exact  opposite  has 
been  the  case.  The  first  in  the  field  was  the  Spiritual 
World. 

It  is  not  necessary  to  reproduce  here  in  detail  the 
argument  which  has  been  stated  recently  with  so 
much  force  in  the  “Unseen  Universe.”  The  conciu- 


* “Poetic  Interpretation  of  Nature,”  p.  115. 


54 


INTRODUCTION. 


sion  of  that  work  remains  still  unassailed,  that  the 
visible  universe  has  been  developed  from  the  unseen. 
Apart  from  the  general  proof  from  the  Law  of  Con- 
tinuity, the  more  special  grounds  of  such  a conclusion 
are,  first,  the  fact  insisted  upon  by  Herschel  and 
Clerk-Maxwell  that  the  atoms  of  which  the  visible 
universe  is  built  up  bear  distinct  marks  of  being 
manufactured  articles ; and,  secondly,  the  origin  in 
time  of  the  visible  universe  is  implied  from  known 
facts  with  regard  to  the  dissipation  of  energy.  With 
the  gradual  aggregation  of  mass  the  energy  of  the 
universe  has  been  slowly  disappearing,  and  this  loss 
of  energy  must  go  on  until  none  remains.  There  is, 
therefore,  a point  in  time  when  the  energy  of  the 
universe  must  come  to  an  end ; and  that  which  has 
its  end  in  time  cannot  be  infinite,  it  must  also  have 
had  a beginning  in  time.  Hence  the  unseen  existed 
before  the  seen. 

There  is  nothing  so  especially  exalted  therefore 
in  the  Natural  Laws  in  themselves  as  to  make  one 
anxious  to  find  them  blood  relations  of  the  Spiritual. 
It  is  not  only  because  these  Laws  are  on  the  ground 
more  accessible  therefore  to  us  who  are  but  ground- 
lings; not  only,  as  the  ‘^Unseen  Universe”  points 
out  in  another  connection,  because  they  are  at  the 
bottom  of  the  list — are  in  fact  the  simplest  and 
lowest — that  they  are  capable  of  being  most  readily 


INTRODUCTION. 


55 


grasped  by  the  finite  intelligences  of  the  universe.”' 
But  their  true  significance  lies  in  the  fact  that  they 
are  on  the  list  at  all,  and  especially  in  that  the  list  ;is 
the  same  list.  Their  dignity  is  not  as  Natural  Laws, 
but  as  Spiritual  Laws,  Laws  which,  as  already  said, 
at  one  end  are  dealing  with  Matter,  and  at  the  other 
with  Spirit.  “The  physical  properties  of  matter  form 
the  alphabet  which  is  put  into  our  hands  by  God,  the 
study  of  which,  if  properly  conducted,  will  enable 
us  more  perfectly  to  read  that  great  book  which  we 
call  the  ‘ Universe.*  **  ^ But,  over  and  above  this,  the 
Natural  Laws  will  enable  us  to  read  that  great  dupli- 
cate which  we  call  the  “ Unseen  Universe,”  and  to 
think  and  live  in  fuller  harmony  with  it.  After  all, 
the  true  greatness  of  Law  lies  in  its  vision  of  the 
Unseen.  Law  in  the  visible  is  the  Invisible  in  the 
visible.  And  to  speak  of  Laws  as  Natural  is  to 
define  them  in  their  application  to  a part  of  the 
universe,  the  sense-part,  whereas  a wider  survey 
would  lead  us  to  regard  all  Law  as  essentially 
Spiritual.  To  magnify  the  Laws  of  Nature,  as  Laws 
of  this  small  world  of  ours,  is  to  take  a provincial 
view  of  the  universe.  Law  is  great  not  because  the 
phenomenal  world  is  great,  but  because  these  vanish- 
irig  lines  are  the  avenues  into  the  eternal  Order 


^ 6th  edition,  p.  235. 


* Ibtd.^  p.  286 


56 


INTROD  UCTION. 


**  Is  it  less  reverent  to  regard  the  universe  as  an 
illimitable  avenue  which  leads  up  to  God,  than  to 
look  upon  it  as  a limited  area  bounded  by  an  im- 
penetrable wall,  which,  if  we  could  only  pierce  it 
would  admit  us  at  once  into  the  presence  of  the 
Eternal  ? ^ Indeed  the  authors  of  the  **  Unseen  Uni- 
verse ” demur  even  to  tjie  expression  material  unu 
vers6y  since,  as  they  tell  us  Matter  is  (though  it  may 
seem  paradoxical  to  say  so)  the  less  important  half 
of  the  material  of  the  physical  universe.''*  And 
even  Mr.  Huxley,  though  in  a different  sense,  assures 
us,  with  Descartes,  ‘^that  we  know  more  of  mind 
than  we  do  of  body ; that  the  immaterial  world  is 
a firmer  reality  than  the  material.”  ^ 

How  the  priority  of  the  Spiritual  improves  the 
strength  and  meaning  of  the  whole  argument  will  be 
seen  at  once.  The  lines  of  the  Spiritual  existed  first, 
and  it  was  natural  to  expect  that  when  the  ‘‘  Intelli- 
gence resident  in  the  ^ Unseen  proceeded  to  frame 
the  material  universe  He  should  go  upon  the  lines 
already  laid  down.  He  would,  in  short,  simply  pro- 
ject the  higher  Laws  downward,  so  that  the  Natural 
World  would  become  an  incarnation,  a visible  repre- 
sentation, ^a  working  model  of  the  spiritual.  The 
whole  function  of  the  material  world  lies  here.  The 

‘ Unseen  Universe,''  p.  96.  ^ Ibid.y  p.  icx>. 

® ‘‘Science  and  Culture,"  p.  259. 


INTRODUCTION. 


57 


world  is  only  a thing  that  is ; it  is  not.  It  is  a 
thing  that  teaches,  yet  not  even  a thing— a show  that 
shows,  a teaching  shadow.  However  useless  the 
demonstration  otherwise,  philosophy  does  well  in 
proving  that  matter  is  a non-entity.  We  work  with 
it  as  the  mathematician  with  an  x.  The  reality  is 
alone  the  Spiritual.  “It  is  very  well  for  physicists 
to  speak  of  ‘ matter,*  but  for  men  generally  to  call 
this  ‘a  material  world*  is  an  absurdity.  Should  we 
call  it  an  ;r-world  it  would  mean  as  much,  viz.,  that 
we  do  not  know  what  it  is.**  ^ When  shall  we  learn 
the  true  mysticism  of  one  who  was  yet  far  from 
being  a mystic — “ We  look  not  at  the  things  which 
are  seen,  but  at  the  things  which  are  not  seen ; 
for  the  things  which  are  seen  are  temporal,  but  the 
thiilgs  which  are  not  seen  are  eternal  ? *’  ^ The  visible 
is  the  ladder  up  to  the  invisible  ; the  temporal  is  but 
the  scaffolding  of  the  eternal  And  when  the  last 
immaterial  souls  have  climbed  through  this  material 
to  God,  the  scaffolding  shall  be  taken  down,  and  the 
earth  dissolved  with  fervent  heat — not  becausfi*  it  was 
base,  but  because  its  work  is  done. 


* Hinton’s  “ Philosophy  and  Religion,”  p.  4a 

* 3 Cor.  iv.  18. 


i 


BIOGENESIS. 

\ 


**  What  we  require  is  no  new  Revelation^  but  simply  an 
adeqicate  conception  of  the  true  essence  of  Christianity,  And 
I believe  that^  as  time  goes  on,  the  work  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
will  be  continuously  shown  in  the  gradual  insight  which  the 
human  race  will  attain  into  the  true  essence  of  the  Christian 
religion.  I am  thus  of  opinion  that  a standing  miracle  exists, 
and  that  it  has  ever  existed — a direct  and  continued  influence 
fTrtrted  by  the  supernatural  on  the  ncUurall^ 

PASIADOXICAL  PHJLOSOPHYc 


BIOGENESIS. 


He  that  hath  the  Son  hath  Life,  and  he  that  hath  not  th« 
Son  of  God  hath  not  Life.” — John, 

" Omne  vivum  ex  vivo.” — Harvey, 

For  two  hundred  years  the  scientific  world  has  been 
rent  with  discussions  upon  the  Origin  of  Life.  Two 
great  schools  have  defended  exactly  opposite  views 
— one  that  matter  can  spontaneously  generate  life, 
the  other  that  life  can  only  come  from  pre-existing 
life.  The  doctrine  of  Spontaneous  Generation,  as 
the  first  is  called,  has  been  revived  within  recent 
years  by  Dr.  Bastian,  after  a series  of  elaborate  ex- 
periments on  the  Beginnings  of  Life.  Stated  in  his 
own  words,  his  conclusion  is  this  : Both  observation 

and  experiment  unmistakeably  testify  to  the  fact 
that  living  matter  is  constantly  being  formed  de  novoy 
in  obedience  to  the  same  laws  and  tendencies  which 
determine  all  the  more  simple  chemical  combina- 
tions."'^ Life,  that  is  to  say,  is  not  the  Gift  of  Life. 

* “ Beginnings  of  Life.”  By  H.  C Bastian,  M.A.,  M.D., 
F.R.S.  Macmillan,  vol.  ii.  p.  633. 


62 


BIOGENESIS. 


It  is  capable  of  springing  into  being  of  itself.  It 
can  be  Spontaneously  Generated. 

This  announcement  called  into  the  field  a phalanx 
of  observers,  and  the  highest  authorities  in  bio^ 
logical  science  engaged  themselves  afresh  upon  the 
problem.  The  experiments  necessary  to  test  the 
matter  can  be  followed  or  repeated  by  any  one  pos- 
sessing the  slightest  manipulative  skill.  Glass  vessels 
are  three-parts  filled  with  infusions  of  hay  or  any 
organic  matter.  They  are  boiled  to  kill  all  germs 
of  life,  and  hermetically  sealed  to  exclude  the  outer 
air.  The  air  inside,  having  been  exposed  to  the 
boiling  temperature  for  many  hours,  is  supposed  to 
be  likewise  dead  ; so  that  any  life  which  may  sub- 
sequently appear  in  the  closed  flasks  must  have 
sprung  into  being  of  itself.  In  Bastian’s  experiments, 
after  every  expedient  to  secure  sterility,  life  did 
appear  inside  in  myriad  quantity.  Therefore,  he 
argued,  it  was  spontaneously  generated. 

But  the  phalanx  of  observers  found  tvio  errors 
in  this  calculation.  Professor  Tyndall  repeated  the 
same  experiment,  only  with  a precaution  to  ensure 
absolute  sterility  suggested  by  the  most  recent 
science — a discovery  of  his  own.  After  every  care, 
he  conceived  there  might  still  be  undestroyed  germs 
in  the  air  inside  the  flasks.  If  the  air  were  abso- 
lutely germless  and  pure,  would  the  myriad-life 


BIOGENESIS. 


63 


appear?  He  manipulated  his  experimental  vessels 
in  an  atmosphere  which  under  the  high  test  of 
optical  purity — the  most  delicate  known  test — was 
absolutely  germless.  Here  not  a vestige  of  life  ap- 
peared. He  varied  the  experiment  in  every  direc- 
tion, but  matter  in  the  germless  air  never  yielded 
life. 

The  other  error  was  detected  by  Mr.  Dallinger. 
He  found  among  the  lower  forms  of  life  the  most 
surprising  and  indestructible  vitality.  Many  animals 
could  survive  much  higher  temperatures  than  Dr. 
Bastian  had  applied  to  annihilate  them.  Some 
germs  almost  refused  to  be  annihilated — they  were 
all  but  fire-proof. 

These  experiments  have  practically  closed  the 
question.  A decided  and  authoritative  conclusion 
has  now  taken  its  place  in  science.  So  far  as  science 
can  settle  anything,  this  question  is  settled.  The 
attempt  to  get  the  living  out  of  the  dead  has  failed. 
Spontaneous  Generation  has  had  to  be  given  up. 
And  it  is  now  recognised  on  every  hand  that  Life 
can  only  come  from  the  touch  of  Life.  Huxley  cat- 
egorically announces  that  the  doctrine  of  Biogenesis, 
or  life  only  from  life,  is  victorious  along  the  whole 
line  at  the  present  day.'*  ^ And  even  whilst  confess- 


^ Critiques  and  Addresses.^’  T.  H.  Huxley,  F.R.S.,  p 239 


BIOGENESIS,  ‘ 


H 

ing  that  he  wishes  the  evidence  were  the  other  way» 
Tyndall  is  compelled  to  say,  **  I affirm  that  no  shred 
of  trustworthy  experimental  testimony  exists  to 
prove  that  life  in  our  day  has  ever  appeared  indepen- 
dently  of  antecedent  life.*’  ^ 

For  much  more  than  two  hundred  years  a similal 
discussion  has  dragged  its  length  through  the  reli- 
gious world.  Two  great  schools  here  also  have  de- 
fended exactly  opposite  views — one  that  the  Spiritual 
Life  in  man  can  only  come  from  pre-existing  Life, 
the  other  that  it  can  Spontaneously  Generate  itself. 
Taking  its  stand  upon  the  initial  statement  of  the 
Author  of  the  Spiritual  Life,  one  small  school,  in 
the  face  of  derision  and  opposition,  has  persistently 
maintained  the  doctrine  of  Biogenesis.  Another, 
larger  and  with  greater  pretension  to  philosophic 
form,  has  defended  Spontaneous  Generation.  The 
weakness  of  the  former  school  consists — though  this 
has  been  much  exaggerated — in  its  more  or  less 
general  adherence  to  the  extreme  view  that  religion 
had  nothing  to  do  with  the  natural  life  ; the  weakness 
of  the  latter  lay  in  yielding  to  the  more  fatal  ex- 
treme that  it  had  nothing  to  do  with  anything  else. 
That  man,  being  a worshipping  animal  by  nature, 
ought  to  maintain  certain  relations  to  the  Supreme 


^ Nineteenth  Century^  1878,  p.  507. 


BIOGENESIS, 


65 

Being,  was  indeed  to  some  extent  conceded  by  the 
naturalistic  school,  but  religion  itself  was  looked 
upon  as  a thing  to  be  spontaneously  generated  by 
the  evolution  of  character  in  the  laboratory  of  com- 
mon life. 

The  difference  between  the  two  positions  is  radical 
Translating  from  the  language  of  Science  into  that 
of  Religion,  the  theory  of  Spontaneous  Generation 
is  simply  that  a man  may  become  gradually  better 
and  better  until  in  course  of  the  process  he  reaches 
that  quality  of  religious  nature  known  as  Spiritual 
Life.  This  Life  is  not  something  added  ab  extra  to 
the  natural  man  ; it  is  the  normal  and  appropriate 
development  of  the  natural  man.  Biogenesis  op- 
poses to  this  the  whole  doctrine  of  Regeneration. 
The  Spiritual  Life  is  the  gift  of  the  Living  Spirit.  The 
spiritual  man  is  no  mere  development  of  the  natural 
man.  H e is  a New  Creation  born  from  Above.  As 
well  expect  a hay  infusion  to  become  gradually  more 
and  more  living  until  in  course  of  the  process  it 
reached  Vitality,  as  expect  a man  by  becoming  better 
and  better  to  attain  the  Eternal  Life. 

The  advocates  of  Biogenesis  in  Religion  have 
founded  their  argument  hitherto  all  but  exclusively 
on  Scripture.  The  relation  of  the  doctrine  to  the 
constitution  and  course  of  Nature  was  not  disclosed. 
Its  importance,  therefore,  was  solely  as  a dogma ; 


F 


66 


BIOGENESIS. 


and  being  directly  concerned  with  the  Supernatural, 
it  was  valid  for  those  alone  who  chose  to  accept  the 
Supernatural. 

Yet  it  has  been  keenly  felt  by  those  who  attempt 
to  defend  this  doctrine  of  the  origin  of  the  Spiritual 
Life,  that  they  have  nothing  more  to  oppose  to  the 
rationalistic  view  than  the  ipse  dixit  of  Revelation. 
The  argument  from  experience,  in  the  nature  of  the 
case,  is  seldom  easy  to  apply,  and  Christianity  has 
always  found  at  this  point  a genuine  difficulty  in 
meeting  the  challenge  of  Natural  Religions.  The 
direct  authority  of  Nature,  using  Nature  in  its  limi^ 
ted  sense,  was  not  here  to  be  sought  foj^.  On  such 
a question  its  voice  was  necessarily  silent ; and  all 
that  the  apologist  could  look  for  lower  down  was 
distant  echo  or  analogy.  All  that  is  really  possible, 
indeed,  is  such  an  analogy  ; and  if  that  can  now  be 
found  in  Biogenesis,  Christianity  in  its  most  central 
position  secures  at  length  a support  and  basis  in  the 
Laws  of  Nature. 

Up  to  the  present  time  the  analogy  required  has 
not  been  forthcoming.  There  was  no  known  parallel 
in  Nature  for  the  spiritual  phenomena  in  question. 
But  now  the  case  is  altered.  With  the  elevation  of 
Biogenesis  to  the  rank  of  a scientific  fact,  all  pro- 
blems concerning  the  Origin  of  Life  are  placed  on 
a different  footing.  And  it  remains  to  be  seer 


BIOGENESIS. 


whether  Religion  cannot  at  once  re-affirm  and  re- 
shape its  argument  in  the  light  of  this  modern 
truth. 

If  the  doctrine  of  the  Spontaneous  Generation  of 
Spiritual  Life  can  be  met  on  scientific  grounds,  it 
will  mean  the  removal  of  the  most  serious  enemy 
Christianity  has  to  deal  with,  and  especially  within 
its  own  borders,  at  the  present  day.  The  religion 
of  Jesus  has  probably  always  suffered  more  from 
those  who  have  misunderstood  than  from  those  who 
have  opposed  it.  Of  the  multitudes  who  confess 
Christianity  at  this  hour  how  many  have  clear  in 
their  minds  the  cardinal  distinction  established  by 
its  Founder  between  **  born  of  the  flesh  and  **  born 
of  the  Spirit  *'?  By  how  many  teachers  of  Chris- 
tianity even  is  not  this  fundamental  postulate  per- 
sistently ignored  ? A thousand  modern  pulpits  every 
seventh  day  are  preaching  the  doctrine  of  Spon- 
taneous Generation.  The  finest  and  best  of  recent 
poetry  is  coloured  with  this  same  error.  Spontaneous 
Generation  is  the  leading  theology  of  the  modern 
religious  or  irreligious  novel  ; and  much  of  the 
most  serious  and  cultured  writing  of  the  day  devotes 
itself  to  earnest  preaching  of  this  impossible  gospel. 
The  current  conception  of  the  Christian  religion  in 
short — the  conception  which  is  held  not  only  popu- 
larly but  by  men  of  culture — is  founded  upon  a view 


68 


BIOGENESIS. 


of  its  origin  which,  if  it  were  true,  would  render  the 
whole  scheme  abortive. 

Let  us  first  place  vividly  in  our  imagination  the 
picture  of  the  two  great  Kingdoms  of  Nature,  the 
inorganic  and  organic,  as  these  now  stand  in  the 
light  of  the  Law  of  Biogenesis.  What  essentially 
is  involved  in  saying  that  there  is  no  Spontaneous 
Generation  of  Life  ? It  is  meant  that  the  passage 
from  the  mineral  world  to  the  plant  or  animal  world 
is  hermetically  sealed  on  the  mineral  side.  Thi^  in- 
organic world  is  staked  off  from  the  living  world  by 
barriers  which  have  never  yet  been  crossed  from 
within.  No  change  of  substance,  no  modification  of 
environment,  no  chemistry,  no  electricity,  nor  any 
form  of  energy,  nor  any  evolution  can  endow  any 
single  atom  of  the  mineral  world  with  the  attribute 
of  Life.  Only  by  the  bending  down  into  this 
dead  world  of  some  living  form  can  these  dead 
atoms  be  gifted  with  the  properties  of  vitality,  with- 
out this  preliminary  contact  with  Life  they  remain 
fixed  in  the  inorganic  sphere  for  ever.  It  is  a very 
mysterious  Law  which  guards  in  this  way  the  portals 
of  the  living  world.  And  if  there  is  one  thing  in 
Nature  more  worth  pondering  for  its  strangeness  it 
ib  the  spectacle  of  this  vast  helpless  world  of  the 
dead  cut  off  from  the  living  by  the  Law  of  Bio- 
genesis and  denied  for  ever  the  possibility  of  resur- 


BIOGENESIS, 


69 


rection  within  itself.  So  very  strange  a thing,  in- 
deed, is  this  broad  line  in  Nature,  that  Science  has 
long  and  urgently  sought  to  obliterate  it.  Bio- 
genesis stands  in  the  way  of  some  forms  of  Evolution 
with  such  stern  persistency  that  the  assaults  upon 
this  Law  for  number  and  thoroughness  have  been 
unparalleled.  But,  as  we  have  seen,  it  has  stood  the 
test.  Nature,  to  the  modern  eye,  stands  broken  in 
two.  The  physical  Laws  may  explain  the  inorganic 
world  ; the  biological  Laws  may  account  for  the  de- 
velopment of  the  organic.  But  of  the  point  where 
they  meet,  of  that  strange  borderland  between  the 
dead  and  the  living.  Science  is  silent  It  is  as  if  God 
had  placed  every tning  in  earth  and  heaven  in  the 
hands  of  Nature,  but  reserved  a point  at  the  genesis 
of  Life  for  His  direct  appearing. 

The  power  of  the  analogy,  for  which  we  are  laying 
the  foundations,  to  seize  and  impress  the  mind,  v/ill 
largely  depend  on  the  vividness  with  which  one 
realizes  the  gulf  which  Nature  places  between  the 
living  and  the  dead,^  But  those  who,  in  contemplat- 


* This  being  the  crucial  point  it  may  not  be  inappropriate  to 
supplement  the  quotations  already  given  in  the  text  with  the 
following  ; — 

“ We  are  in  the  presence  of  the  one  incommunicable  gulf — 
the  gulf  of  all  gulfs — that  gulf  which  Mr.  Huxley’s  protoplasm 
is  as  powerless  to  efface  as  any  other  material  expedient  that  has 


70 


lOGENESIS. 


ing  Nature,  have  found  their  attention  arrested  by 
this  extraordinary  dividing-line  severing  the  visible 
universe  eternally  into  two ; those  who  in  watching 
the  progress  of  science  have  seen  barrier  after  barrier 
disappear — barrier  between  plant  and  plant,  between 
animal  and  animal,  and  even  between  animal  and 
plant — but  this  gulf  yawn  more  hopelessly  wide  with 
every  advance  of  knowledge,  will  be  prepared  to 
attach  a significance  to  the  Law  of  Biogenesis  and 
its  analogies  more  profound  perhaps  than  to  any 
other  fact  or  law  in  Nature.  If,  as  Pascal  says. 
Nature  is  an  image  of  grace ; if  the  things  that  are 
seen  are  in  any  sense  the  images  of  the  unseen,  there 
must  lie  in  this  great  gulf  fixed,  this  most  unique 


ever  been  suggested  since  the  eyes  of  men  first  looked  into  it  — 
the  mighty  gulf  between  death  and  life.” — “As  Regards  Proto- 
plasm.” By  J.  Hutchinson  Stirling,  LL.D.,  p.  42. 

“ The  present  state  of  knowledge  furnishes  us  with  no  link  be- 
tween the  living  and  the  not-living.” — Huxley,  “Encyclopaedia 
Britannica”  (new  Ed.).  Art.  “ Biology.” 

“ Whoever  recalls  to  mind  the  lamentable  failure  of  all  the 
attempts  made  very  recently  to  discover  a decided  support  for 
the  generatio  cequivoca  in  the  lower  forms  of  transition  from  the 
inorganic  to  the  organic  world,  will  feel  it  doubly  serious  to  de- 
mand that  this  theory,  so  utterly  discredited,  should  be  in  any 
way  accepted  as  the  basis  of  all  our  views  of  life.” — Virchow  : 
“The  Freedom  of  Science  in  the  Modern  State.” 

“All  really  scientific  experience  tells  us  that  life  can  be  pro- 
duced from  a living  antecedent  only.”— “The  Unseen  Universe." 
6th  Ed.  p.  229. 


BIOGENESIS. 


7* 


and  startling  of  all  natural  phenomena,  a meaning 
of  peculiar  moment 

Where  now  in  the  Spiritual  spheres  shall  we  meet 
a companion  phenomenon  to  this  ? What  in  the 
Unseen  shall  be  likened  to  this  deep  dividing-line, 
or  where  in  human  experience  is  another  barrier 
which  never  can  be  crossed  ? 

There  is  such  a barrier.  In  the  dim  but  not 
inadequate  vision  of  the  Spiritual  World  presented 
in  the  Word  of  God,  the  first  thing  that  strikes 
the  eye  is  a great  gulf  ^xed.  The  passage  from 
the  Natural  World  to  the  Spiritual  World  is  hermeti- 
cally sealed  on  the  natural  side.  The  door  from 
the  inorganic  to  the  organic  is  shut,  no  mineral 
can  open  it ; so  the  door  from  the  natural  to  the 
spiritual  is  shut,  and  no  man  can  open  it.  This 
world  of  natural  men  is  staked  off  from  the  Spiritual 
Wo»*ld  by  barriers  which  have  never  yet  been  crossed 
from  within.  No  organic  change,  no  modification 
of  environment,  no  mental  energy,  no  moral  effort, 
no  evolution  of  character,  no  progress  of  civilization 
can  endow  any  single  human  soul  with  the  attribute 
of  Spiritual  Life.  The  Spiritual  World  is  guarded 
from  the  world  next  in  order  beneath  it  by  a law 
of  Biogenesis — except  a man  be  born  again  . . , 

except  a man  be  born  of  water  and  of  the  Spirit^  hi 
cannot  enter  the  Kingdom  of  God. 


72 


BIOGENESIS. 


It  is  not  said,  in  this  enunciation  of  the  law,  that 
if  the  condition  be  not  fulfilled  the  natural  man 
will  not  enter  the  Kingdom  of  God.  The  word  is 
safinot.  For  the  exclusion  of  the  spiritually  inor- 
ganic from  the  Kingdom  of  the  spiritually  organic 
is  not  arbitrary.  Nor  is  the  natural  man  refused 
admission  on  unexplained  grounds.  His  admission 
is  a scientific  impossibility.  Except  a mineral  be 
born  “from  above” — from  the  Kingdom  just  above 
it — it  cannot  enter  the  Kingdom  just  above  it. 
And  except  a man  be  iborn  “from  above,”  by  the 
same  law,  he  cannot  enter  the  Kingdom  just  above 
him.  There  being  no  passage  from  one  Kingdom  to 
another,  whether  from  inorganic  to  organic,  or  from 
organic  to  spiritual,  the  intervention  of  Life  is  a 
scientific  necessity  if  a stone  or  a plant  or  an  animal 
or  a man  is  to  pass  from  a lower  to  a higher  sphere. 
The  plant  stretches  down  to  the  dead  world  .beneath 
it,  touches  its  minerals  and  gases  with  its  mystery 
of  Life,  and  brings  them  up  ennobled  and  trans- 
formed to  the  living  sphere.  The  breath  of  God, 
blowing  where  it  listeth,  touches  with  its  mystery 
of  Life  the  dead  souls  of  men,  bears  them  across 
the  bridgeless  gulf  between  the  natural  and  the 
spiritual,  between  the  spiritually  inorganic  and  the 
spiritually  organic,  endows  them  with  its  own  high 
qualities,  and  develops  within  them  these  new  and 


BIOGENESIS. 


73 


secret  faculties,  by  which  those  who  are  born  again 
are  said  to  see  the  Kingdom  of  God. 

What  is  the  evidence  for  this  great  gulf  fixed  at 
the  portals  of  the  Spiritual  World  ? Does  Science 
close  this  gate,  or  Reason,  or  Experience,  or  Reve- 
lation ? We  reply,  all  four.  The  initial  statement, 
it  is  not  to  be  denied,  reaches  us  from  Revelation. 
But  is  not  this  evidence  here  in  court  ? Or  shall  it 
be  said  that  any  argument  deduced  from  this  is  a 
transparent  circle — that  after  all  we  simply  come 
back  to  the  unsubstantiality  of  the  ipse  dixit?  Not 
altogether,  for  the  analogy  lends  an  altogether  new 
authority  to  the  ipse  dixit.  How  substantial  that 
argument  really  is,  is  seldom  realized.  We  yield 
the  point  here  much  too  easily.  The  right  of  the 
Spiritual  World  to  speak  of  its  own  phenomena 
is  as  secure  as  the  right  of  the  Natural  World  to 
speak  of  itself.  What  is  Science  but  what  the 
Natural  World  has  said  to  natural  men  ? What  is 
Revelation  but  what  the  Spiritual  World  has  said 
to  Spiritual  men  } Let  us  at  least  ask  what  Reve- 
lation has  announced  with  reference  to  this  Spiritual 
Law  of  Biogenesis ; afterwards  we  shall  inquire 
whether  Science,  while  endorsing  the  verdict,  may 
not  also  have  some  further  vindication  of  its  title 
to  be  heard. 

The  words  of  Scripture  which  preface  this  inquiry 


74 


BIOGENESIS. 


contain  an  explicit  and  original  statement  of  the 
Law  of  Biogenesis  for  the  Spiritual  Life. 
that  hath  the  Son  hath  Life,  and  he  that  hath  not 
the  Son  of  God  hath  not  Life.”  Life,  that  is  to  say, 
depends  upon  contact  with  Life.  It  cannot  spring 
up  of  itself.  It  cannot  develop  out  of  anything 
that  is  not  Life.  There  is  no  Spontaneous 
Generation  in  religion  any  more  than  in  Nature. 
Chqist  is  the  source  of  Life  in  the  Spiritual  World  ; 
and  he  that  hath  the  Son  hath  Life,  and  he  that 
hath  not  the  Son,  whatever  else  he  may  have,  hath 
not  Life.  Here,  in  short,  is  the  categorical  denial 
of  Abiogenesis  and  the  establishment  in  this  high 
field  of  the  classical  formula  Omne  vivu7fi  ex  vivo — 
no  Life  without  antecedent  Life.  In  this  mystical 
theory  of  the  Origin  of  Life  the  whole  of  the  New 
Testament  writers  are  agreed.  And,  as  we  have 
already  seen,  Christ  Himself  founds  Christianity 
upon  Biogenesis  stated  in  its  most  literal  form. 
‘‘  Except  a man  be  born  of  water  and  of  the  Spirit 
he  cannot  enter  into  the  Kingdom  of  God.  That 
which  is  born  of  the  flesh  is  flesh ; and  that  which 
is  born  of  the  Spirit  is  Spirit.  Marvel  not  that 
I said  unto  you,  ye  must  be  born  again.”  ^ Why 
did  He  add  Marvel  not?  Did  He  seek  to  allay 


^ John  uL 


BIOGENESIS. 


75 


the  fear  in  the  bewildered  ruler’s  mind  that  there 
was  more  in  this  novel  doctrine  than  a simple 
analogy  from  the  first  to  the  second  birth  ? 

The  attitude  of  the  natural  man,  again,  with 
reference  to  the  Spiritual,  is  a subject  on  which  the 
New  Testament  is  equally  pronounced.  Not  only 
in  his  relation  to  the  spiritual  man,  but  to  the 
whole  Spiritual  World,  the  natural  man  is  regarded 
as  dead.  He  is  as  a crystal  to  an  organism.  The 
natural  world  is  to  the  Spiritual  as  the  inorganic 
to  the  organic.  " To  be  carnally  minded  is  Deathr  ^ 
Thou  hast  a name  to  live,  but  art  Dead!'  ^ ‘‘  She 

that  liveth  in  pleasure  is  Dead  while  she  liveth.”^ 
‘‘To  you  hath  He  given  Life  which  Dead  in 
trespasses  and  sins.”^ 

It  is  clear  that  a remarkable  harmony  exists 
here  between  the  Organic  World  as  arranged  by 
Science  and  the  Spiritual  World  as  arranged  by 
Scripture.  We  find  one  great  Law  guarding  the 
thresholds  of  both  worlds,  securing  that  entrance 
from  a lower  sphere  shall  only  take  place  by  a 
direct  regenerating  act,  and  that  emanating  from 
the  world  next  in  order  above.  There  are  not  two 
laws  of  Biogenesis,  one  for  the  natural,  the  other 
for  the  Spiritual ; one  law  is  for  both.  Wherever 


^ Rom.  viii.  6. 


* Rev.  iii.  i. 


• I Tim.  V.  6.  ^ Eph.  ii.  i,  5. 


76 


BIOGENESIS. 


there  is  Life,  Life  of  any  kind,  this  same  law  holds* 
The  analogy,  therefore,  is  only  among  the  phe- 
nomena ; between  laws  there  is  no  analogy — -there 
is  Continuity.  In  either  case,  the  first  step  in 
peopling  these  worlds  with  the  appropriate  living 
forms  is  virtually  miracle.  Nor  in  one  case  is  there 
less  of  mystery  in  the  act  than  in  the  other.  The 
second  birth  is  scarcely  less  perplexing  to  the  theo- 
logian than  the  first  to  the  embryologist. 

A moment’s  reflection  ought  now  to  make  it  clear 
why  in  the  Spiritual  World  there  had  to  be  added 
to  this  mystery  the  further  mystery  of  its  proclama- 
tion through  the  medium  of  Revelation.  This  is  the 
point  at  which  the  scientific  man  is  apt  to  part 
company  with  the  theologian.  He  insists  on  having 
all  things  materialised  before  his  eyes  in  Nature. 
If  Nature  cannot  discuss  this  with  him,  there  is 
nothing  to  discuss.  But  Nature  can  discuss  this 
with  him — only  she  cannot  open  the  discussion  or 
supply  all  the  material  to  begin  with.  If  Science 
averred  that  she  could  do  this,  the  theologian  this 
time  must  part  company  with  such  Science.  For 
any  Science  which  makes  such  a demand  is  false  to 
the  doctrines  of  Biogenesis.  What  is  this  but  the 
demand  that  a lower  world,  hermetically  sealed 
against  all  communication  with  a world  above  it, 
should  have  a mature  and  intelligent  acquaintance 


BIOGENESIS. 


77 


with  Its  phenomena  and  laws  ? Can  the  mineral 
discourse  to  me  of  animal  Life  ? Can  it  tell  me 
what  lies  beyond  the  narrow  boundary  of  its  inert 
being  ? Knowing  nothing  of  other  than  the  chemical 
and  physical  laws,  what  is  its  criticism  worth  of  the 
principles  of  Biology  ? And  even  when  some  visitor 
from  the  upper  world,  for  example  some  root  from 
a living  tree,  penetrating  its  dark  recess,  honours 
it  with  a touch,  will  it  presume  to  define  the  form 
and  purpose  of  its  patron,  or  until  the  bioplasm  has 
done  its  gracious  work  can  it  even  know  that  it  is 
being  touched  ? The  barrier  which  separates  King- 
doms from  one  another  restricts  mind  not  less  than 
matter.  Any  information  of  the  Kingdoms  above 
it  that  could  come  to  the  mineral  world  could  only 
come  by  a communication  from  above.  An  analogy 
from  the  lower  world  might  make  such  communi- 
cation intelligible  as  well  as  credible,  but  the  infor- 
mation in  the  first  instance  must  be  vouchsafed  as 
a revelation.  Similarly  if  those  in  the  Organic 
Kingdom  are  to  know  anything  of  the  Spiritual 
World,  that  knowledge  must  at  least  begin  as  Reve- 
lation. Men  who  reject  this  source  of  information, 
by  the  Law  of  Biogenesis,  can  have  no  other.  It 
is  no  spell  of  ignorance  arbitrarily  laid  upon  certain 
members  of  the  Organic  Kingdom  that  prevents 
tliem  reading  the  secrets  of  the  Spiritual  World 


78 


BIOirENESIS. 


It  is  a scientific  necessity.  No  exposition  of  the 
case  could  be  more  truly  scientific  than  this : “ The 
natural  man  receiveth  not  the  things  of  the  Spirit 
of  God  ; for  they  are  foolishness  unto  him  : neithef 
;an  he  know  them,  because  they  are  spiritually  dis- 
cerned.” ^ The  verb  here,  it  will  be  again  observed, 
is  potential.  This  is  not  a dogma  of  theology, 
but  a necessity  of  Science.  And  Science,  for  the 
most  part,  has  consistently  accepted  the  situation. 
It  has  always  proclaimed  its  ignorance  of  the 
Spiritual  World.  When  Mr.  Herbert  Spencer 
affirms,  “ Regarding  Science  as  a gradually  increas- 
ing sphere  we  may  say  that  every  addition  to  its 
surface  does  but  bring  it  into  wider  contact  with 
surrounding  nescience,”  ^ from  his  standpoint  he 
is  quite  correct.  The  endeavours  of  well-meaning 
persons  to  show  that  the  Agnostic's  position,  when 
he  asserts  his  ignorance  of  the  Spiritual  World,  is 
only  a pretence ; the  attempts  to  prove  that  he 
really  knows  a great  deal  about  it  if  he  would  only 
admit  it,  are  quite  misplaced.  He  really  does  not 
know.  The  verdict  that  the  natural  man  receiveth 
not  the  things  of  the  Spirit  of  God,  that  they  are 
foolishness  unto  him,  that  neither  can  he  know  them, 
is  final  as  a statement  of  scientific  truth — a statement 

* I Cor.  ii.  14. 

• ^ First  Principles,”  2nd  Ed.,  p.  17. 


BIOGENESIS. 


79 


on  which  the  entire  Agnostic  literature  is  simply 
one  long  commentary. 

We  are  now  in  a better  position  to  follow  cut  the 
more  practical  bearings  of  Biogenesis.  There  is  an 
immense  region  surrounding  Regeneration,  a dark 
and  perplexing  region  where  men  would  be  thank- 
ful for  any  light  It  may  well  be  that  Biogenesis 
in  its  many  ramifications  may  yet  reach  down  to 
some  of  the  deeper  mysteries  of  the  Spiritual  Life. 
But  meantime  there  is  much  to  define  even  on  the 
surface.  And  for  the  present  we  shall  content 
ourselves  by  turning  its  light  upon  one  or  two 
points  of  current  interest. 

It  must  long  ago  have  appeared  how  decisive 
is  the  answer  of  Science  to  the  practical  question 
with  which  we  set  out  as  to  the  possibility  of 
a Spontaneous  Development  of  Spiritual  Life  in 
the  individual  soul.  The  inquiry  into  the  Origin 
of  Life  is  the  fundamental  question  alike  of  Biology 
and  Christianity.  We  can  afford  to  enlarge  upon 
it,  therefore,  even  at  the  risk  of  repetition.  When 
men  are  offering  us  a Christianity  without  a living 
Spirit,  and  a personal  religion  without  conversion^  no 
emphasis  or  reiteration  can  be  extreme.  Besides, 
the  clearness  as  well  as  the  definiteness  of  the 
Testimony  of  Nature  to  any  Spiritual  truth  is  oi. 
immense  importance.  Regeneration  has  not  merely 


So 


BIOGENESIS, 


been  an  outstanding  difficulty,  but  an  overwhelming 
obsc^irity.  Even  to  earnest  minds  the  difficulty  of 
grasping  the  truth  at  all  has  always  proved  extreme 
Philosophically  one  scarcely  sees  either  the  necessity 
or  the  possibility  of  being  born  again.  Why  a vir- 
tuous man  should  not  simply  grow  better  and  better 
until  in  his  own  right  he  enter  the  Kingdom  of  God 
is  what  thousands  honestly  and  seriously  fail  to 
understand.  Now  Philosophy  cannot  help  us  here. 
Her  arguments  are,  if  anything,  against  us.  But 
Science  answers  to  the  appeal  at  once.  If  it  be 
simply  pointed  out  that  this  is  the  same  absurdity 
as  to  ask  why  a stone  should  not  grow  more  and 
more  living  till  it  enters  the  Organic  World,  the  point 
is  clear  in  an  instant. 

What  now,  let  us  ask  specifically,  distinguishes 
a Christian  man  from  a non-Christian  man } Is  it 
that  he  has  certain  mental  characteristics  not  pos- 
sessed by  the  other  ? Is  it  that  certain  faculties 
have  been  trained  in  him,  that  morality  assumes 
special  and  higher  manifestations,  and  character 
a nobler  torm  ? Is  the  Christian  merely  an  ordinary 
man  who  happens  from  birth  to  have  been  sur- 
rounded with  a peculiar  set  of  ideas  ? Is  his  religion 
merely  that  peculiar  quality  of  the  moral  life  defined 
by  Mr.  Matthew  A.rnold  as  “morality  touched  by 
emotion  ? And  does  the  possession  of  a high  ideal. 


BIOGENESIS. 


St 


benevolent  sympathies,  a reverent  spirit,  and  a 
favourable  environment  account  for  what  men  call 
his  Spiritual  Life  ? 

The  distinction  between  them  is  the  same  as  that 
between  the  Organic  and  the  Inorganic,  the  living 
and  the  dead.  What  is  the  difference  between 
a crystal  and  an  organism,  a stone  and  a plant  ? 
They  have  much  in  common.  Both  are  made  of  the 
same  atoms.  Both  display  the  same  properties 
of  matter.  Both  are  subject  to  the  Physical  Laws. 
Both  may  be  very  beautiful.  But  besides  possessing 
all  that  the  crystal  has,  the  plant  possesses  something 
more — a mysterious  something  called  Life.  This 
Life  is  not  something  which  existed  in  the  crystal 
only  in  a less  developed  form.  There  is  nothing 
at  all  like  it  in  the  crystal.  There  is  nothing  like 
the  first  beginning  of  it  in  the  crystal,  not  a trace 
or  symptom  of  it.  This  plant  is  tenanted  by  some- 
thing new,  an  original  and  unique  possession  added 
over  and  above  all  the  properties  common  to  both. 
When  from  vegetable  Life  we  rise  to  animal  Life, 
here  again  we  fmd  something  original  and  unique — 
unique  at  least  as  compared  with  the  mineral 
From  animal  Life  we  ascend  again  to  Spiritual  Life. 
And  here  also  is  something  new,  something  still 
more  unique.  He  who  lives  the  Spiritual  Life  has 
a distinct  kind  of  Life  added  to  all  the  other  phase.? 


G 


82 


BIOGENESIS. 


of  Life  which  he  manifests — a kind  of  Life  infinitely 
more  distinct  than  is  the  active  Life  of  a plant 
from  the  inertia  of  a stone.  The  Spiritual  man  is 
more  distinct  in  point  of  fact  than  is  the  plant  from 
the  stone.  This  is  the  one  possible  comparison  in 
Nature,  for  it  is  the  widest  distinction  in  Nature  ; 
but  compared  with  the  difference  between  the 
Natural  and  the  Spiritual  the  gulf  which  divides 
the  organic  from  the  inorganic  is  a hair’s-breadth. 
The  natural  man  belongs  essentially  to  this  present 
order  of  things.  He  is  endowed  simply  with  a high 
quality  of  the  natural  animal  Life.  But  it  is  Life 
of  so  poor  a quality  that  it  is  not  Life  at  all.  He 
that  hath  not  the  Son  hath  not  Life ; but  he  that 
hath  the  Son  hath  Life — a new  and  distinct  and 
supernatural  endowment.  He  is  not  of  this  world. 
He  is  of  the  timeless  state,  of  Eternity.  It  doth  not 
yet  appear  what  he  shall  be. 

The  difference  then  between  the  Spiritual  man  and 
the  Natural  man  is  not  a difference  of  development, 
but  of  generation.  It  is  a distinction  of  quality  not 
of  quantity.  A man  cannot  rise  by  any  natural 
development  from  “ morality  touched  by  emotion,” 
to  “ morality  touched  by  Life.”  Were  we  to  con- 
struct a scientific  classification.  Science  would  compel 
us  to  arrange  all  natural  men,  moral  or  immoral, 
edu‘:ated  or  vulgar,  as  one  family.  One  might  be 


BIOGENESIS. 


83 


high  in  the  family  group,  another  low;  yet,  practi- 
cally, they  are  marked  by  the  same  set  of  character- 
istics— they  eat,  sleep,  work,  think,  live,  die.  But 
the  Spiritual  man  is  removed  from  this  family  so 
utterly  by  the  possession  of  an  additional  character- 
istic that  a biologist,  fully  informed  of  the  whole 
circumstances,  would  not  hesitate  a moment  to 
classify  him  elsewhere.  And  if  he  really  entered 
into  these  circumstances  it  would  not  be  in  another 
family  but  in  another  Kingdom.  It  is  an  old- 
fashioned  theology  which  divides  the  world  in  this 
way — which  speaks  of  men  as  Living  and  Dead, 
Lost  and  Saved — a stern  theology  all  but  fallen  into 
disuse.  This  difference  between  the  Living  and  the 
Dead  in  souls  is  so  unproved  by  casual  observation, 
so  impalpable  in  itself,  so  startling  as  a doctrine, 
that  schools  of  culture  have  ridiculed  or  denied  the 
grim  distinction.’  Nevertheless  the  grim  distinction 
must  be  retained.  It  is  a scientific  distinction.  He 
that  hath  not  the  Son  hath  not  Life.” 

Now  it  is  this  great  Law  which  finally  distinguishes 
Christianity  from  all  other  religions.  It  places  the 
religion  of  Christ  upon  a footing  altogether  unique. 
There  is  no  analogy  between  the  Christian  religion 
and,  say,  Buddhism  or  the  Mohammedan  religion. 
There  is  no  true  sense  in  which  a man  can  say.  He 
that  hath  Buddha  hath  Life.  Buddha  has  nothing 


BIOGENESIS. 


S4 

to  do  with  Life.  He  may  have  something  to  do 
with  morality.  He  may  stimulate,  impress,  teach, 
guide,  but  there  is  no  distinct  new  thing  added  to 
the  souls  of  those  who  profess  Buddhism.  These 
religions  may  be  developments  of  the  natural,  mental, 
or  moral  man.  But  Christianity  professes  to  be 
more.  It  is  the  mental  or  moral  man  plus  something 
else  or  some  One  else.  It  is  the  infusion  into  the 
Spiritual  man  of  a New  Life,  of  a quality  unlike 
anything  else  in  Nature.  This  constitutes  the  sepa- 
rate Kingdom  of  Christ,  and  gives  to  Christianity 
alone  of  all  the  religions  of  mankind  the  strange 
mark  of  Divinity. 

Shall  we  next  inquire  more  precisely  what  is  this 
something  extra  which  constitutes  Spiritual  Life? 
What  is  this  strange  and  new  endowment  in  its 
nature  and  vital  essence  ? And  the  answer  is  brief — 
it  is  Christ.  He  that  hath  the  Son  hath  Life. 

Are  we  forsaking  the  lines  of  Science  in  saying 
so?  Yes  and  No.  Science  has  drawn  for  us  the 
distinction.  It  has  no  voice  as  to  the  nature  of  the 
distinction  except  this — that  the  new  endowment  is 
a something  different  from  anything  else  with  which 
it  deals.  It  is  not  ordinary  Vitality,  it  is  not  intel- 
lectual, it  is  not  moral,  but  something  beyond.  And 
Revelation  steps  in  and  names  what  it  is — it  is  Christ 
Out  of  the  multitude  of  sentences  where  this  ani* 


BIOGENESIS. 


85 


nouncement  is  made,  these  few  may  be  selected : 
Know  ye  not  your  own  selves  how  that  Jesus  Christ 
is  in  “Your  bodies  are  the  members  of 

Christ/’  * “ At  that  day  ye  shall  know  that  I am  in 
the  Father,  and  ye  in  Me,  and  I in  you.”  ^ “ We 

Avill  come  unto  him  and  make  our  abode  with  him.”^ 
“ I am  the  Vine,  ye  are  the  branches.” * “I  am 
crucified  with  Christ,  nevertheless  I live,  yet  not  I, 
but  Christ  liveth  in  me.”  ® 

Three  things  are  clear  from  these  statements ; 
First,  They  are  not  mere  figures  of  rhetoric.  They 
are  explicit  declarations.  If  language  means  any- 
thing these  words  announce  a literal  fact.  In  some 
of  Christ’s  own  statements  the  literalism  is  if  possible 
still  more  impressive.  For  instance,  “ Except  ye  eat 
the  flesh  of  the  Son  of  man  and  drink  His  blood,  ye 
have  no  life  in  you.  Whoso  eateth  My  flesh  and 
drinketh  My  blood  hath  eternal  life ; and  I will  raise 
him  up  at  the  last  day.  For  My  flesh  is  meat  indeed, 
and  My  blood  is  drink  indeed.  He  that  eateth  My 
flesh  and  drinketh  My  blood  dwelleth  in  Me  and  I in 
him'' 

In  the  second  place,  Spiritual  Life  is  not  some- 
thing outside  ourselves.  The  idea  is  not  that  Christ 
is  in.  heaven  and  that  we  can  stretch  out  some 

* 2 Cor.  xii.  5.  2 I Qqj.  s 

♦ John  xiv.  21-23.  * John  xv.  4.  ® Gal.  ii.  20. 


S6 


BIOGENESIS. 


mysterious  faculty  and  deal  with  Him  there.  This 
IS  the  vague  form  in  which  many  conceive  the  truth 
but  it  is  contrary  to  Christ’s  teaching  and  to  the 
analogy  of  nature.  Vegetable  Life  is  not  contained 
in  a reservoir  somewhere  in  the  skies,  and  measured 
out  spasmodically  at  certain  seasons.  The  Life  is  in 
every  plant  and  tree,  inside  its  own  substance  and 
tissue,  and  continues  there  until  it  dies.  This  locali- 
sation of  Life  in  the  individual  is  precisely  the  point 
where  Vitality  differs  from  the  other  forces  of  nature, 
such  as  magnetism  and  electricity.  Vitality  has 
much  in  common  with  such  forces  as  magnetism 
and  electricity,  but  there  is  one  inviolable  distinction 
between  them — that  Life  is  permanently  fixed  and 
rooted  in  the  organism.  The  doctrines  of  conserva- 
tion and  transformation  of  energy,  that  is  to  say,  do 
not  hold  for  Vitality.  The  electrician  can  demag- 
netise a bar  of  iron,  that  is,  he  can  transform  its 
energy  of  magnetism  into  something  else — heat,  or 
motion,  or  light — and  then  re-form  these  back  into 
magnetism.  P'or  magnetism  has  no  root,  no  indi- 
viduality, no  fixed  indwelling.  But  the  biologist 
cannot  devitalise  a plant  or  an  animal  and  revivify 
it  again.^  Life  is  not  one  of  the  homeless  forces 

* One  must  not  be  misled  by  popular  statements  m this 
connection,  such  as  this  of  Professor  Owen^s : “ There  are 
organisms  which  we  can  devitalise  and  revitalise — devive  and 


BIOGENESIS. 


87 


which  promiscuously  inhabit  space,  or  which  can  be 
gathered  like  electricity  from  the  clouds  and  dissi- 
pated back  again  into  space.  Life  is  definite  and 
resident ; and  Spiritual  Life  is  not  a visit  from  a 
force,  but  a resident  tenant  in  the  soul. 

This  is,  however,  to  formulate  the  statement  of  the 
third  point,  that  spiritual  Life  is  not  an  ordinary 
form  of  energy  or  force.  The  analogy  from  Nature 
endorses  this,  but  here  Nature  stops.  It  cannot  say 
what  Spiritual  Life  is.  Indeed  what  natural  Life  is 
remains  unknown,  and  the  word  Life  still  wanders 
through  Science  without  a definition.  Nature  is 
silent,  therefore,  and  must  be  as  to  Spiritual  Life. 
But  in  the  absence  of  natural  light  we  fall  back  upon 
that  complementary  revelation  which  always  shines 
when  truth  is  necessary  and  where  Nature  fails.  We 
ask  with  Paul  when  this  Life  first  visited  him  on  the 
Damascus  road.  What  is  this?  ‘‘Who  art  Thou 
Lord  ? ” And  we  hear,  “ I am  Jesus.”  ^ 

We  must  expect  to  find  this  denied.  Besides  a 
proof  from  Revelation,  this  is  an  argument  from 
experience.  And  yet  we  shall  still  be  told  that  this 
Spiritual  Life  is  a force.  But  let  it  be  remembered 

revive — many  times.”  {Monthly  Microscopical  Journal^  May, 
1869,  p.  294.)  The  reference  is  of  course  to  the  extraordinary 
capacity  for  resuscitation  possessed  by  in^ny  of  the  Protozoa 
and  other  low  forms  of  life. 

‘ Acts  ix.  5. 


88 


BIOGENESIS. 


what  this  means  in  Science,  it  means  the  heresy  of 
confounding  Force  with  Vitality.  We  must  also 
expect  to  be  told  that  this  Spiritual  Life  is  simply  a 
development  of  ordinary  Life — ^just  as  Dr.  Bastian 
tells  us  that  natural  Life  is  formed  according  to  the 
same  laws  which  determine  the  more  simple  chemical 
combinations.  But  remember  what  this  means  in 
Science.  It  is  the  heresy  of  Spontaneous  Generation, 
a heresy  so  thoroughly  discredited  now  that  scarcely 
an  authority  in  Europe  will  lend  his  name  tc  it. 
Who  art  Thou,  Lord } Unless  we  are  to  be  allowed 
to  hold  Spontaneous  Generation  there  is  no  alterna- 
tive : Life  can  only  come  from  Life  : I am  Jesus.'* 

A hundred  other  questions  now  rush  into  the  mind 
about  this  Life : How  does  it  come  "i  Why  does  it 
come  ? How  is  it  manifested  ? What  faculty  does 
it  employ  ? Where  does  it  reside  ? Is  it  communi- 
cable } What  are  its  conditions  ? One  or  two  of 
these  questions  may  be  vaguely  answered,  the  rest 
bring  us  face  to  face  with  mystery.  Let  it  not  be 
thought  that  the  scientific  treatment  of  a Spiritual 
subject  has  reduced  religion  to  a problem  of  physics, 
or  demonstrated  God  by  the  laws  of  biology.  A 
religion  without  mystery  is  an  absurdity.  Even 
Science  has  its  mysteries,  none  more  inscrutable  than 
around  this  Science  of  Life.  It  taught  us  sooner  or 
later  to  expect  mystery,  and  now  we  enter  its  domain 


BIOGENESIS. 


89 


Let  it  be  carefully  marked,  however,  that  the  ^:loud 
does  not  fall  and  cover  us  till  we  have  ascertained 
the  most  momentous  truth  of  Religion — that  Christ 
is  in  the  Christian. 

Not  that  there  is  anything  new  in  this.  The 
Churches  have  always  held  that  Christ  was  the 
source  of  Life.  No  spiritual  man  ever  claims  that  his 
spirituality  is  his  own.  ‘‘  I live,”  he  will  tell  you  ; 

nevertheless  it  is  not  I,  but  Christ  liveth  in  me.” 
Christ  our  Life  has  indeed  been  the  only  doctrine  in 
the  Christian  Church  from  Paul  to  Augustine,  froni 
Calvin  to  Newman.  Yet,  when  the  Spiritual  man 
is  cross-examined  upon  this  confession  it  is  astonish- 
ing to  find  what  uncertain  hold  it  has  upon  his  mrind. 
Doctrinally  he  states  it  adequately  and  holds  it 
unhesitatingly.  But  when  pressed  with  the  literal 
question  he  shrinks  from  the  answer.  We  do  not 
really  believe  that  the  Living  Christ  has  touched  us, 
that  He  makes  His  abode  in  us.  Spiritual  Life  is 
not  as  real  to  us  as  natural  Life.  And  we  cover  our 
retreat  into  unbelieving  vagueness  with  a plea  of 
reverence,  justified,  as  we  think,  by  the  "Thus  far 
and  no  farther”  of  ancient  Scriptures.  There  is 
often  a great  deal  of  intellectual  sin  concealed  under 
this  old  aphorism.  When  men  do  not  really  wish  to 
go  farther  they  find  it  an  honourable  convenience 
sometimes  to  sit  down  on  the  outermost  edge  of  the 


BIOGENESIS. 


Holy  Ground  on  the  pretext  of  taking  off  their  shoes. 
Yet  we  must  be  certain  that,  making  a virtue  of 
reverence,  we  are  not  merely  excusing  ignorance  ; 
or,  under  the  plea  of  mystery,  evading  a truth  which 
has  been  stated  in  the  New  Testament  a hundred 
times,  in  the  most  literal  form,  and  with  all  but 
monotonous  repetition.  The  greatest  truths  are 
always  the  most  loosely  held.  And  not  the  least  of 
the  advantages  of  taking  up  this  question  from  the 
present  standpoint  is  that  we  may  see  how  a con- 
fused doctrine  can  really  bear  the  luminous  definition 
of  Science  and  force  itself  upon  us  with  all  the 
weight  of  Natural  Law. 

What  is  mystery  to  many  men,  what  feeds  their 
worship,  and  at  the  same  time  spoils  it,  is  that  area 
round  all  great  truth  which  is  really  capable  of  illu- 
mination, and  into  which  every  .earnest  mind  is 
permitted  and  commanded  to  go  with  a light  We 
cry  mystery  long  before  the  region  of  mystery  comes. 
True  mystery  casts  no  shadows  around.  It  is  a 
sudden  and  awful  gulf  yawning  across  the  field  of 
knowledge ; its  form  is  irregular,  but  its  lips  are 
clean  cut  and  sharp,  and  the  mind  can  go  to  the  very 
verge  and  look  down  the  precipice  into  the  dim 
abyss, — 

“ Where  writhing  clouds  unroll, 

Striving  to  utter  themselves  in  shapes.” 


BIOGENESIS, 


91 


We  have  gone  with  a light  to  the  very  verge  cf  this 
truth.  We  have  seen  that  the  Spiritual  Life  is 
an  endowment  from  the  Spiritual  World,  and  that 
the  Living  Spirit  of  Christ  dwells  in  the  Christian, 
But  now  the  gulf  yawns  black  before  us.  What 
more  does  Science  know  of  Life  ? Nothing.  It 
knows  nothing  further  about  its  origin  in  detail. 
It  knows  nothing  about  its  ultimate  nature.  It 
cannot  even  define  it.  There  is  a helplessness  in 
scientific  books  here,  and  a continual  confession  of 
it  which  to  thoughtful  minds  is  almost  touching. 
Science,  therefore,  has  not  eliminated  the  true  mys- 
teries from  our  faith,  but  only  the  false.  And  it  has 
done  more.  It  has  made  true  mystery  scientific. 
Religion  in  having  mystery  is  in  analogy  with  all 
around  it.  Where  there  is  exceptional  mystery  in 
the  Spiritual  world  it  will  generally  be  found  that 
there  is  a corresponding  mystery  in  the  natural 
world.  And,  as  Origen  centuries  ago  insisted,  the 
difficulties  of  Religion  are  simply  the  difficulties  of 
Nature. 

One  question  more  we  may  look  at  for  a moment. 
What  can  be  gathered  on  the  surface  as  to  the 
process  of  Regeneration  in  the  individual  soul 
From  the  analogies  of  Biology  we  should  expect 
three  things:  First,  that  the  New  Life  should  dawn 
suddenly;  Second,  that  it  should  come  ‘‘without  ob«. 


9^  BIOGENESIS.  , 

servation  ” ; Third,  that  it  should  develop  gradually, 
On  two  of  these  points  there  can  be  little  controversy. 
The  gradualness  of  growth  is  a characteristic  which 
strikes  the  simplest  observer.  Long  before  the  word 
Evolution  was  coined  Christ  applied  it  in  this  very 
connection — First  the  blade,  then  the  ear,  then  the 
full  corn  in  the  ear.”  It  is  well  known  also  to  those 
who  study  the  parables  of  Nature  that  there  is  an 
ascending  scale  of  slowness  as  we  rise  in  the  scale 
of  Life.  Growth  is  most  gradual  in  the  highest 
forms.  Man  attains  his  maturity  after  a score  of 
years ; the  monad  completes  its  humble  cycle  in  a 
day.  What  wonder  if  development  be  tardy  in  the 
Creature  of  Eternity  ? A Christian’s  sun  has  some- 
times set,  and  a critical  world  has  seen  as  yet  no  corn 
in  the  ear.  As  yet  ? " As  yet,”  in  this  long  Life, 

has  not  begun.  Grant  him  the  years  proportionate 
to  his  place  in  the  scale  of  Life.  “The  time  of 
harvest  is  not  yet,  ” 

Again,  in  addition  to  being  slow,  the  phenomena 
of  growth  are  secret.  Life  is  invisible.  When  the 
New  Life  manifests  itself  it  is  a surprise.  Thou  canst 
not  tell  whence  it  cometh  or  whither  it  goeth.  When 
the  plant  lives  whence  has  the  Life  come?  When 
it  dies  whither  has  it  gone  ? Thou  canst  not  teU 

. . so  is  every  one  that  is  born  of  the  Spirit.  For 
the  kingdom  of  God  cometh  without  observation. 


BIOGENESIS, 


93 


Yet  once  more, — and  this  is  a point  of  strange  and 
frivolous  dispute, — this  Life  comes  suddenly.  This  is 
the  only  way  in  which  Life  can  come.  Life  cannot 
come  gradually — health  can,  structure  can,  but  not 
Life,  A new  theology  has  laughed  at  the  Doctrine 
of  Conversion.  Sudden  Conversion  especially  has 
been  ridiculed  as  untrue  to  philosophy  and  impossible 
to  human  nature.  We  may  not  be  concerned  in 
buttressing  any  theology  because  it  is  old.  But  we 
find  that  this  old  theology  is  scientific.  There  may 
be  cases — they  are  probably  in  the  majority — where 
the  moment  of  contact  with  the  Living  Spirit  though 
sudden  has  been  obscure.  But  the  real  moment 
and  the  conscious  moment  are  two  different  things. 
Science  pronounces  nothing  as  to  the  conscious 
moment.  If  it  did  it  would  probably  say  that 
that  was  seldom  the  real  moment — just  as  in  the 
natural  Life  the  conscious  moment  is  not  the  real 
moment.  The  moment  of  birth  in  the  natural  world 
is  not  a conscious  moment — we  do  not  know  we  are 
born  till  long  afterward.  Yet  there  are  men  to  whom 
the  Origin  of  the  New  Life  in  time  has  been  no 
difficulty.  To  Paul,  for  instance,  Christ  seems  to 
have  come  at  a definite  period  of  time,  the  exact 
moment  and  second  of  which  could  have  been 
known.  And  this  is  certainly,  in  theory  at  least,  the 
normal  Origin  of  Life,  according  to  the  principles 


94 


BIOGENESIS. 


of  Biology.  The  line  between  the  living  and  the 
dead  is  a sharp  line.  When  the  dead  atoms  of 
Carbon,  Hydrogen,  Oxygen,  Nitrogen,  are  seized 
upon  by  Life,  the  organism  at  first  is  very  lowly. 
It  possesses  few  functions.  It  has  little  beauty. 
Growth  is  the  work  of  time.  But  Life  is  not.  That 
comes  in  a moment.  At  one  moment  it  was  dead  ; 
the  next  it  lived.  This  is  conversion,  the  ‘‘  passing,’* 
as  the  Bible  calls  it,  from  Death  unto  Life.”  Those 
who  have  stood  by  another’s  side  at  the  solemn  hour 
of  this  dread  possession  have  been  conscious  some- 
times of  an  experience  which  words  are  not  allowed 
to  utter — a something  like  the  sudden  snapping  of  a 
chain,  the  waking  from  a dream. 


DEGENERATION, 


®*/  went  by  ike  field  of  the  slothful^  and  by  the  vineyard  oj 
the  man  void  of  understanding;  and  loy  it  was  all  grown  over 
with  thornsy  and  nettles  had  covered  the  face  thereofy  and  the 
stone  wall  thereof  was  broken  down.  Then  I saw  and  con- 
sidered it  well : I looked  upon  it  and  received  instruction.^-^ 
Solomon. 


DEGENERATION. 

“How  shall  we  escape  if  we  neglect  so  great  salvation F** 
— Hebrews, 

“ We  have  as  possibilities  either  Balance,  or  Elaboration,  or 
Degeneration.” — E,  Ray  Lankester, 

In  one  of  his  best  known  books,  Mr.  Darwin  brings 
out  a fact  which  may  be  illustrated  in  some  such 
way  as  this:  Suppose  a bird  fancier  collects  a flock 
of  tame  pigeons  distinguished  by  all  the  infinite 
ornamentations  of  their  race.  They  are  of  all  kinds, 
of  every  shade  of  colour,  and  adorned  with  every 
variety  of  marking.  He  takes  them  to  an  unin- 
habited island  and  allows  them  to  fly  off  wild  into 
the  woods.  They  found  a colony  there,  and  after 
the  lapse  of  many  years  the  owner  returns  to  the 
spot.  He  will  find  that  a remarkable  change  has 
taken  place  in  the  interval.  The  birds,  or  their 
descendants  rather,  have  all  become  changed  into 
the  same  colour.  The  black,  the  white  and  the 
dun,  the  striped,  the  spotted,  and  the  ringed,  are  all 
metamorphosed  into  one — a dark  slaty  blue.  Two 


H 


DEGENERA  TION. 


plain  black  bands  monotonously  repeat  themselves 
upon  the  wings  of  each,  and  the  loins  beneath  are 
white  ; but  all  the  variety,  all  the  beautiful  colours^ 
all  the  old  graces  of  form  it  may  be,  have  disap- 
peared. These  improvements  were  the  result  of  care 
and  nurture,  of  domestication,  of  civilization;  and 
now  that  these  influences  are  removed,  the  birds 
themselves  undo  the  past  and  lose  what  they  had 
gained.  The  attempt  to  elevate  the  race  has  been 
mysteriously  thwarted.  It  is  as  if  the  original  bird, 
the  far  remote  ancestor  of  all  doves,  had  been  blue, 
and  these  had  been  compelled  by  some  strange  law 
to  discard  the  badges  of  their  civilization  and  con«* 
form  to  the  ruder  image  of  the  first.  The  natural 
law  by  which  such  a change  occurs  is  called  The 
Principle  of  Reversion  to  Type, 

It  is  a proof  of  the  universality  of  this  law  that 
the  same  thing  will  happen  with  a plant  A garden 
is  planted,  let  us  say,  with  strawberries  and  roses, 
and  for  a number  of  years  is  left  alone.  In  process 
of  time  it  will  run  to  waste.  But  this  does  not  mean 
that  the  plants  will  really  waste  away,  but  that  they 
will  change  into  something  else,  and,  as  it  invariably 
appears,  into  something  worse ; in  the  one  case, 
namely,  into  the  small,  wild  strawberry  of  the  woods, 
and  in  the  other  into  the  primitive  dog-rose  of  the 
hedges. 


DEGENERA  TION, 


99 


If  we  neglect  a garden  plant,  then,  a natural 
principle  of  jleterioration  comes  in,  and  changes  it 
into  a worse  plant  And  if  we  neglect  a bird,  by 
the  same  imperious  law  it  will  be  gradually  changed 
into  an  uglier  bird.  Or  if  we  neglect  almost  any 
of  the  domestic  animals,  they  will  rapidly  revert 
to  wild  and  worthless  forms  again. 

Now  the  same  thing  exactly  would  happen  in  the 
case  of  you  or  me.  Why  should  Man  be  an  excep- 
tion to  any  of  the  laws  of  Nature.^  Nature  knows 
him  simply  as  an  animal — Sub-kingdom  Vertebrata, 
Class  Mammalia^  Order  Bimana,  And  the  law  ol 
Reversion  to  Type  runs  through  all  creation.  If  a 
man  neglect  himself  for  a few  years  he  will  change 
into  a worse  man  and  a lower  man.  If  it  is  his 
body  that  he  neglects,  he  will  deteriorate  into  a wild 
and  bestial  savage — like  the  de-humanized  men  who 
are  discovered  sometimes  upon  desert  islands.  If 
it  is  his  mind,  it  will  degenerate  into  imbecility  and 
madness — solitary  confinement  has  the  power  to 
unmake  men’s  minds  and  leave  them  idiots.  If  he 
neglect  his  conscience,  it  will  run  off  into  lawlessness 
and  vice.  Or,  lastly,  if  it  is  his  soul,  it  must  in- 
evitably atrophy,  drop  off  in  ruin  and  decay. 

We  have  here,  then,  a thoroughly  natural  basis  for 
the  question  before  us.  If  we  neglect,  with  this 
universal  principle  staring  us  in  the  face,  how  shall 


100 


DEGENERA  TION. 


we  escape  ? If  we  neglect  the  ordinary  means  of 
keeping  a garden  in  order,  how  shall  |t  escape  run- 
ning to  weeds  and  waste?  Or,  if  we  neglect  the 
opportunities  for  cultivating  the  mind,  how  shall  it 
escape  ignorance  and  feebleness?  So,  if  we  neglect 
the  soul,  how  shall  it  escape  the  natural  retrograde 
movement,  the  inevitable  relapse  into  barrenness 
and  death  ? 

It  is  not  necessary,  surely,  to  pause  for  proof  that 
there  is  such  a retrograde  principle  in  the  being  of 
every  man.  It  is  demonstrated  by  facts,  and  by 
the  analogy  of  all  Nature.  Three  possibilities  of  life, 
according  to  Science,  are  open  to  all  living  organisms 
—Balance,  Evolution,  and  Degeneration.  The  first 
denotes  the  precarious  persistence  of  a life  along 
what  looks  like  a level  path,  a character  which  seems 
to  hold  its  own  alike  against  the  attacks  of  evil  and 
the  appeals  of  good.  It  implies  a set  of  circumstances 
so  balanced  by  choice  or  fortune  that  they  neither 
influence  for  better  nor  for  worse.  But  except  in 
theory  this  state  of  equilibrium,  normal  in  the  in- 
organic kingdom,  is  really  foreign  to  the  world  of 
life ; and  what  seems  inertia  may  be  a true  Evolution 
unnoticed  from  its  slowness,  or  likelier  still  a move- 
ment of  Degeneration  subtly  obliterating  as  it  falls 
the  very  traces  of  its  former  height.  From  this  state 
of  apparent  Balance,  Evolution  is  the  escape  in  the 


DEGENERA  TION, 


lOI 


upward  direction,  Degeneration  in  the  lower.  But 
Degeneration,  rather  than  Balance  or  Elaboration,  is 
the  possibility  of  life  embraced  by  the  majority  of 
mankind.  And  the  choice  is  determined  by  man's  own 
nature.  The  life  of  Balance  is  difficult.  It  lies  on  the 
verge  of  continual  temptation,  its  perpetual  adjust- 
ments become  fatiguing,  its  measured  virtue  is  mono- 
tonous and  uninspiring.  More  difficult  still,  appar- 
ently, is  the  life  of  ever  upward  growth.  Most  men 
attempt  it  for  a time,  but  growth  is  slow ; and  despair 
overtakes  them  while  the  goal  is  far  away.  Yet 
none  of  these  reasons  fully  explains  the  fact  that  the 
alternative  which  remains  is  adopted  by  the  majority 
of  men.  That  Degeneration  is  easy  only  half 
accounts  for  it.  Why  is  it  easy  ? Why  but  that 
already  in  each  man's  very  nature  this  principle  is 
supreme  ? He  feels  within  his  soul  a silent  drifting 
motion  impelling  him  downward  with  irresistible 
force.  Instead  of  aspiring  to  Conversion  to  a higher 
Type  he  submits  by  a law  of  his  nature  to  Reversion 
to  a lower.  This  is  Degeneration — that  principle  by 
which  the  organism,  failing  to  develop  itself,  failing 
even  to  keep  what  it  has  got,  deteriorates,  and 
becomes  more  and  more  adapted  to  a degraded  form 
of  life. 

All  men  who  know  themselves  are  conscious  that 
this  tendency,  deep-rooted  and  active,  exists  within 


102 


DEGENERA  TION. 


their  nature.  Theologically  it  is  described  as  a 
gravitation,  a bias  toward  evil.  The  Bible  view  is 
that  man  is  conceived  in  sin  and  shapeir  in  iniquity. 
And  experience  tells  him  that  he  will  shape  himself 
»uto  further  sin  and  ever  deepening  iniquity  without 
the  smallest  effort,  without  in  the  least  intending  it, 
and  in  the  most  natural  way  in  the  world  if  he 
simply  let  his  life  run.  It  is  on  this  principle  that, 
completing  the  conception,  the  wicked  are  said 
further  in  the  Bible  to  be  lost.  They  are  not  really 
lost  as  yet,  but  they  are  on  the  sure  way  to  it.  The 
bias  of  their  lives  is  in  full  action.  There  is  no  drag 
on  anywhere.  The  natural  tendencies  are  having 
it  all  their  own  way;  and  although  the  victims  may 
be  quite  unconscious  that  all  this  is  going  on,  it  is 
patent  to  every  one  who  considers  even  the  natural 
bearings  of  the  case  that  the  end  of  these  things 
is  Death.^’  When  we  see  a man  fall  from  the  top 
of  a five-storey  house,  we  say  the  man  is  lost.  We 
say  that  before  he  has  fallen  a foot;  for  the  same 
principle  that  made  him  fall  the  one  foot  will  un- 
doubtedly make  him  complete  the  descent  by  falling 
other  eighty  or  ninety  feet.  So  that  he  is  a dead 
man,  or  a lost  man  from  the  very  first.  The  gravi- 
tation of  sin  in  a human  soul  acts  precisely  in  the 
same  way.  Gradually,  with  gathering  momentum 
it  sinks  a man  further  and  further  from  God  atid 


DEGENERA  TJON 


103 


righteousness,  and  lands  him,  by  the  sheer  action  of 
a natural  law,  in  the  hell  of  a neglected  life. 

But  the  lesson  is  not  less  clear  fiom  analogy 
Apart  even  from  the  law  of  Degeneration,  apart 
from  Reversion  to  Type,  there  is  in  every  living 
organism  a law  of  Death.  We  are  wont  to  imagine 
that  Nature  is  full  of  Life.  In  reality  it  is  full  of 
Death.  One  cannot  say  it  is  natural  for  a plant  to 
live.  Examine  its  nature  fully,  and  you  have  to 
admit  that  its  natural  tendency  is  to  die.  It  is 
kept  from  dying  by  a mere  temporary  endowment, 
which  gives  it  an  ephemeral  dominion  over  the 
elements — gives  it  power  to  utilize  for  a brief  span 
the  rain,  the  sunshine,  and  the  air.  Withdraw  this 
temporary  endowment  for  a moment  and  its  true 
nature  is  revealed.  Instead  of  overcoming  Nature  it 
is  overcome.  The  very  things  which  appeared  to 
minister  to  its  growth  and  beauty  now  turn  against 
it  and^  make  it  decay  and  die.  The  sun  which 
warmed  it,  withers  it ; the  air  and  rain  which 
nourished  it,  rot  it.  It  is  the  very  forces  which 
we  associate  with  life  which,  when  their  true  nature 
appears,  are  discovered  to  be  really  the  ministers 
of  death. 

This  law,  which  is  true  for  the  whole  plant-world, 
is  also  valid  for  the  animal  and  for  man.  Air  is 
not  life,  but  corruption — so  literally  corruption  that 


104 


DEGENERA  TION. 


the  only  way  to  keep  out  corruption,  when  life  has 
ebbed,  is  to  keep  out  air.  Life  is  merely  a tempo- 
rary suspension  of  these  destructive  powers ; and 
this  is  truly  one  of  the  most  accurate  definitions 
of  life  we  have  yet  received — “ the  sum  total  of  the 
functions  which  resist  death.” 

Spiritual  life,  in  like  manner,  is  the  sum  total  of 
the  functions  which  resist  sin.  The  soul's  atmosphere 
is  the  daily  trial,  circumstance,  and  temptation  of 
the  world.  And  as  it  is  life  alone  which  gives  the 
plant  power  to  utilize  the  elements,  and  as,  without 
it,  they  utilize  it,  so  it  is  the  spiritual  life  alone 
which  gives  the  soul  power  to  utilize  temptation  and 
trial  ; and  without  it  they  destroy  the  soul.  How 
shall  we  escape  if  we  refuse  to  exercise  these  func- 
tions— in  other  words,  if  we  neglect  ? 

This  destroying  process,  observe,  goes  on  quite 
independently  of  God's  judgment  on  sin.  God's 
judgment  on  sin  is  another  and  a more  awful  fact 
of  which  this  may  be  a part.  But  it  is  a distinct 
fact  by  itself,  which  we  can  hold  and  examine 
separately,  that  on  purely  natural  principles  the 
soul  that  is  left  to  itself  unwatched,  uncultivated, 
unredeemed,  must  fall  away  into  death  by  its  own 
nature.  The  soul  that  sinneth  ‘‘  it  shall  die.”  It 
shall  die,  no’;  necessarily  because  God  passes  sen- 
tence of  death  upon  it,  but  because  it  cannot  help 


DEGENERATION, 


105 


dying.  It  has  neglected  " the  functions  which  resist 
death,”  and  has  always  been  dying.  The  punish- 
ment is  in  its  very  nature,  and  the  sentence  is  being 
gradually  carried  out  all  along  the  path  of  life  by 
ordinary  processes  which  enforce  the  verdict  with 
the  appalling  faithfulness  of  law. 

There  is  an  affectation  that  religious  truths  lie 
beyond  the  sphere  of  the  comprehension  which 
serves  men  in  ordinary  things.  This  question  at 
least  must  be  an  exception.  It  lies  as  near  the 
natural  as  the  spiritual.  If  it  makes  no  impression 
on  a man  to  know  that  God  will  visit  his  iniquities 
upon  him,  he  cannot  blind  himself  to  the  fact  that 
Nature  will.  Do  we  not  all  know  what  it  is  to  be 
punished  by  Nature  for  disobeying  her?  We  have 
looked  round  the  wards  of  a hospital,  a prison,  or 
a madhouse,  and  seen  there  Nature  at  work  squaring 
her  accounts  with  sin.  And  we  knew  as  we  looked 
that  if  no  Judge  sat  on  the  throne  of  heaven  at 
all  there  was  a Judgment  there,  where  an  inexorable 
Nature  was  crying  aloud  for  justice,  and  carrying 
out  her  heavy  sentences  for  violated  laws. 

When  God  gave  Nature  the  law  into  her  own 
hands  in  this  way,  He  seems  to  have  given  her 
two  rules  upon  which  her  sentences  were  to  be  based. 
The  one  is  formally  enunciated  in  this  sentence, 
“Whatsoever  a man  soweth  that  shall  he 


io6 


DEGENkKA  TION. 


ALSO  reap/’  The  Other  is  informally  expressed  in 
this,  ‘‘If  we  neglect  how  shall  we  escape?’^ 
The  first  is  the  positive  law,  and  deals  with  sins 
of  commission.  The  other,  which  we  are  now  dis- 
cussing, is  the  negative,  and  deals  with  sins  of 
omission.  It  does  not  say  anything  about  sowing, 
but  about  not  sowing.  It  takes  up  the  case  of  souls 
which  are  lying  fallow.  It  does  not  say,  if  we  sow 
corruption  we  shall  reap  corruption.  Perhaps  we 
would  not  be  so  unwise,  so  regardless  of  ourselves, 
of  public  opinion,  as  to  sow  corruption.  It  does 
not  say,  if  we  sow  tares  we  shall  reap  tares.  We 
might  never  do  anything  so  foolish  as  sow  tares. 
But  if  we  sow  nothing,  it  says,  we  shall  reap  nothing. 
If  we  put  nothing  into  the  field,  we  shall  take  nothing 
out.  If  we  neglect  to  cultivate  in  summer,  how 
shall  we  escape  starving  in  winter  } 

Now  the  Bible  raises  this  question,  but  does  not 
answer  it — because  it  is  too  obvious  to  need  answer- 
ing. How  shall  we  escape  if  we  neglect  ? The 
answer  is,  we  cannot.  In  the  nature  of  things  we 
cannot.  We  cannot  escape  any  more  than  a man 
can  escape  drowning  who  falls  into  the  sea  and 
has  neglected  to  learn  to  swim.  In  the  nature  of 
things  he  cannot  escape — nor  can  he  escape  who  has 
neglected  the  great  salvation. 

Now  why  should  such  fatal  consequences  follow 


DEGENERA  TION 


107 


a simple  process  like  neglect  ? The  popular  im- 
pression is  that  a man,  to  be  what  is  called  lost,  must 
be  an  open  and  notorious  sinner,  He  must  be  one 
who  has  abandoned  all  that  is  good  and  pure  in  life, 
and  sown  to  the  flesh  with  all  his  might  and  main. 
But  this  principle  goes  further.  It  says  simply, 
If  we  neglect.”  Any  one  may  see  the  reason 
why  a notoriously  wicked  person  should  not  escape  ; 
but  w^hy  should  not  all  the  rest  of  us  escape  1 What 
is  to  hinder  people  who  are  not  notoriously  wicked 
escaping — people  who  never  sowed  anything  in  par- 
ticular? Why  is  it  such  a sin  to  sow  nothing  in 
particular  ? 

There  must  be  some  hidden  and  vital  relation 
between  these  three  words,  Salvation,  Neglect,  and 
Escape — some  reasonable,  essential,  and  indissoluble 
connection.  Why  are  these  words  so  linked  together 
as  to  weight  this  clause  with  all  the  authority  and 
solemnity  of  a sentence  of  death  ? 

The  explanation  has  partly  been  given  already. 
It  lies  still  further,  however,  in  the  meaning  of  the 
word  Salvation.  And  this,  of  course,  is  not  at  all 
Salvation  in  the  ordinary  sense  of  forgiveness  of  sin. 
This  is  one  great  meaning  of  Salvation,  the  first  and 
the  greatest.  But  this  is  spoken  to  people  who  are 
supposed  to  have  had  this.  It  is  the  broader  word, 
therefore,  and  includes  not  only  forgiveness  of  sin 


io8 


DEGENERA  TION 


but  salvation  or  deliverance  from  the  downward  bias 
of  the  soul.  It  takes  in  that  whole  process  of  rescue 
from  the  power  of  sin  and  selfishness  that  should 
be  going  on  from  day  to  day  in  every  human  life. 
We  have  seen  that  there  is  a natural  principle  in 
man  lowering  him,  deadening  him,  pulling  him  down 
by  inches  to  the  mere  animal  plane,  blinding  reason, 
searing  conscience,  paralysing  will.  This  is  the 
active  destroying  principle,  or  Sin.  Now  to  counter- 
act this,  God  has  discovered  to  us  another  principle 
which  will  stop  this  drifting  process  in  the  soul, 
steer  it  round,  and  make  it  drift  the  other  way. 
This  is  the  active  saving  principle,  or  Salvation.  If 
a man  find  the  first  of  these  powers  furiously  at 
work  within  him,  dragging  his  whole  life  downward 
to  destruction,  there  is  only  one  way  to  escape  his 
fate — to  take  resolute  hold  of  the  upward  power, 
and  be  borne  by  it  to  the  opposite  goal.  And  as 
this  second  power  is  the  only  one  in  the  universe 
which  has  the  slightest  real  effect  upon  the  first, 
how  shall  a man  escape  if  he  neglect  it } To  neglect 
it  is  to  cut  off  the  only  possible  chance  of  escape. 
In  declining  this  he  is  simply  abandoning  himself 
with  his  eyes  open  to  that  other  and  terrible  energy 
which  is  already  there,  and  which,  in  the  natural 
course  of  things,  is  bearing  him  every  moment 
further  and  further  from  escape. 


DEGENERATION. 


109 


From  the  very  nature  of  Salvation,  therefore,  it  is 
plain  that  the  only  thing  necessary  to  make  it  of  no 
efiect  is  neglect.  Hence  the  Bible  could  not  fail  to 
lay  strong  emphasis  on  a word  so  vital.  It  was  not 
necessary  for  it  to  say,  how  shall  we  escape  if  we 
trample  upon  the  great  salvation,  or  doubt,  or  de- 
spise, or  reject  it.  A man  who  has  been  poisoned 
only  need  neglect  the  antidote  and  he  will  die.  It 
makes  no  difference  whether  he  dashes  it  on  the 
ground,  or  pours  it  out  of  the  window,  or  s*ets  it  down 
by  his  bedside,  and  stares  at  it  all  the  time  he  is 
dying.  He  will  die  just  the  same,  whether  he  de- 
stroys it  in  a passion,  or  coolly  refuses  to  have  any- 
thing to  do  with  it.  And  as  a matter  of  fact  probably 
most  deaths,  spiritually,  are  gradual  dissolutions  of 
the  last  class  rather  than  rash  suicides  of  the  first. 

This,  then,  is  the  effect  of  neglecting  salvation 
from  the  side  of  salvation  itself ; and  the  conclusion 
is  that  from  the  very  nature  of  salvation  escape  is  out 
of  the  question.  Salvation  is  a definite  process.  If 
a man  refuse  to  submit  himself  to  that  process, 
clearly  he  cannot  have  the  benefits  of  it  As  many 
as  received  Him  to  them  gave  He  power  to  become  the 
sons  of  God,  He  does  not  avail  himself  of  this 
power.  It  may  be  mere  carelessness  or  apathy. 
Nevertheless  the  neglect  is  fatal.  He  cannot  escape 
because  he  will  not 


fio 


DEGENERATION. 


Turn  now  to  another  aspect  of  the  case — to  the 
effect  upor  the  soul  itself.  Neglect  does  more  for 
the  soul  than  make  it  miss  salvation.  It  despoils 
it  of  its  capacity  for  salvation.  Degeneration  in 
the  spiritual  sphere  involves  primarily  the  impairing 
of  the  faculties  of  salvation  and  ultimately  the  loss 
of  them.  It  really  means  that  the  very  soul  itself 
becomes  piecemeal  destroyed  until  the  very  capacity 
for  God  and  righteousness  is  gone. 

The  soul,  in  its  highest  sense,  is  a vast  capacity  for 
God.  It  is  like  a curious  chamber  added  on  to  being, 
and  somehow  involving  being,  a chamber  with  elastic 
and  contractile  walls,  which  can  be  expanded,  with 
God  as  its  guest,  inimitably,  but  which  without  God 
shrinks  and  shrivels  until  every  vestige  of  the  Divine 
is  gone,  and  God’s  image  is  left  without  God’s  Spirit 
One  cannot  call  what  is  left  a soul ; it  is  a shrunken, 
useless  organ,  a capacity  sentenced  to  death  by  dis- 
use, which  droops  as  a withered  hand  by  the  side, 
and  cumbers  nature  like'  a rotted  branch.  Nature 
has  her  revenge  upon  neglect  as  well  as  upon  extra- 
vagance. Misuse,  with  her,  is  as  mortal  a sin  as  abuse. 

There  are  certain  burrowing  animals — the  mole  for 
instance — which  have  taken  to  spending  their  lives 
beneath  the  surface  of  the  ground.  And  Nature  has 
taken  her  revenge  upon  them  in  a thoroughly  natural 
way — she  has  closed  up  their  eyes.  If  they  mean  to 


DEGENERA  TION 


III 


live  in  darkness,  she  argues,  eyes  are  obviously  a 
superfluous  function.  By  neglecting  them  these 
animals  made  it  clear  they  do  not  want  them. 
And  as  one  of  Nature’s  fixed  principles  is  that 
nothing  shall  exist  in  vain,  the  eyes  are  presently 
taken  away,  or  reduced  to  a rudimentary  state. 
There  are  fishes  also  which  have  had  to  pay  the 
same  terrible  forfeit  for  having  made  their  abode  in 
dark  caverns  where  eyes  can  never  be  required.  And 
in  exactly  the  same  way  the  spiritual  eye  must  die 
and  lose  its  power  by  purely  natural  law  if  the  soul 
choose  to  walk  in  darkness  rather  than  in  light. 

This  is  the  meaning  of  the  favourite  paradox  of 
Christ,  From  him  that  hath  not  shall  be  taken 
away  even  that  which  he  hath  ; ” take  therefore  the 
talent  from  him.”  The  religious  faculty  is  a talent, 
the  most  splendid  and  sacred  talent  we  possess.  Yet 
it  is  subject  to  the  natural  conditions  and  laws.  H 
any  man  take  his  talent  and  hide  it  in  a napkin, 
although  it  is  doing  him  neither  harm  nor  good 
apparently,  God  will  not  allow  him  to  have  it.  Al- 
though it  is  lying  there  rolled  up  in  the  darkness,  not 
conspicuously  affecting  any  one,  still  God  will  not 
allow  him  to  keep  it.  He  will  not  allow  him  to  keep 
it  any  more  than  Nature  would  allow  the  fish  to 
keep  their  eyes.  Therefore,  He  says,  ‘‘take  the 
talent  from  him.”  And  Nature  does  it 


112 


DEGENERATION, 


This  •man’s  crime  was  simply  neglect- — ‘*thou 
wicked  and  slothful  servant.”  It  was  a wasted  life — 
a life  which  failed  in  the  holy  stewardship  of  itself. 
Such  a life  is  a peril  to  all  who  cross  its  path.  De- 
generation compasses  Degeneration.  It  is  only  a 
character  which  is  itself  developing  that  can  aid  the 
Evolution  of  the  world  and  so  fulfil  the  end  of  life 
For  this  high  usury  each  of  our  lives,  however  small 
may  seem  our  capital,  was  given  us  by  God.  And  it 
is  just  the  men  whose  capital  seems  small  who  need 
to  choose  the  best  investments.  It  is  significant  that 
it  was  the  man  who  had  only  one  talent  who  was 
guilty  of  neglecting  it.  Men  with  ten  talents,  men  of 
large  gifts  and  burning  energies,  either  direct  their 
powers  nobly  and  usefully,  or  misdirect  them  irre- 
trievably. It  is  those  who  belong  to  the  rank  and 
file  of  life  who  need  this  warning  most.  Others  have 
an  abundant  store  and  sow  to  the  spirit  or  the  flesh 
with  a lavish  hand.  But  we,  with  our  small  gift^ 
what  boots  our  sowing  ? Our  temptation  as  ordinary 
men  is  to  neglect  to  sow  at  all.  The  interest  on  our 
talent  would  be  so  small  that  we  excuse  ourselves 
with  the  reflection  that  it  is  not  worth  while. 

It  is  no  objection  to  all  this  to  say  that  we  arc 
unconscious  of  this  neglect  or  misdirection  of  our 
powers.  That  is  the  darkest  feature  in  the  case.  If 
there  were  uneasiness  there  might  be  hope.  If  there 


DEGENERA  TION. 


113 

were,  somewhere  about  our  soul,  a something  which 
was  not  gone  to  sleep  like  all  the  rest ; if  there  were 
a contending  force  anywhere ; if  we  would  let  even 
that  work  instead  of  neglecting  it,  it  would  gain 
strength  from  hour  to  hour,  and  waken  up  one  at  a 
time  each  torpid  and  dishonoured  faculty  till  our 
whole  nature  became  alive  with  strivings  against  self, 
and  every  avenue  was  open  wide  for  God.  But  the 
apathy,  the  numbness  of  the  soul,  what  can  be  said  of 
such  a symptom  but  that  it  means  the  creeping  on 
of  death  ? There  are  accidents  in  which  the  victims 
feel  no  pain.  They  are  well  and  strong  they  think. 
But  they  are  dying.  And  if  you  ask  the  surgeon  by 
their  side  what  makes  him  give  this  verdict,  he  will 
say  it  is  this  numbness  over  the  frame  which  tells  hoM 
some  of  the  parts  have  lost  already  the  very  capacity 
for  life. 

Nor  is  it  the  least  tragic  accompaniment  of  this 
process  that  its  effects  may  even  be  concealed  from 
others.  The  soul  undergoing  Degeneration,  surely 
by  some  arrangement  with  Temptation  planned  in 
the  uttermost  hell,  possesses  the  power  of  absolute 
secrecy.  When  all  within  is  festering  decay  and 
rottenness,  a Judas,  without  anomaly,  may  kiss  his 
Lord.  This  invisible  consumption,  like  its  fell  ana- 
logue in  the  natural  world,  may  even  keep  its  victim 
beautiful  while  slowly  slaying  it  When  one  ex- 


I 


DEGENERA  TION. 


1 14 

amines  the  little  Crustacea  which  have  inhabited  for 
centuries  the  lakes  of  the  Mammoth  Cave  of  Ken- 
tucky, one  is  at  first  astonished  to  find  these  animals 
apparently  endowed  with  perfect  eyes.  The  pallor 
of  the  head  is  broken  by  two  black  pigment  specks, 
conspicuous  indeed  as  the  only  bits  of  colour  on  the 
whole  blanched  body ; and  these,  even  to  the  casual 
observer,  certainly  represent  well-defined  organs  of 
vision.  But  what  do  they  with  eyes  in  these  Sty- 
gian waters?  There  reigns  an  everlasting  night 
Is  the  law  for  once  at  fault } A swift  incision  with 
the  scalpel,  a glance  with  a lens,  and  their  secret  is 
betrayed.  The  eyes  are  a mockery.  Externally 
they  are  organs  of  vision — the  front  of  the  eye  is 
perfect ; behind,  there  is  nothing  but  a mass  of  ruins. 
The  optic  nerve  is  a shrunken,  atrophied  and  insen- 
sate thread.  These  animals  have  organs  of  vision, 
and  yet  they  have  no  vision.  They  have  eyes,  but 
they  see  not. 

Exactly  what  Christ  said  of  men  : They  had  eyes, 
but  no  vision.  And  the  reason  is  the  same.  It  is 
the  simplest  problem  of  natural  history.  The 
tacea  of  the  Mammoth  Cave  have  chosen  to  abide  in 
darkness.  Therefore  they  have  become  fitted  for  it. 
By  refusing  to  see  they  have  waived  the  right  to  see. 
And  Nature  has  grimly  humoured  them.  Nature  had 
to  do  it  by  her  very  constitution.  It  is  her  defence 


DEGENERA  TION. 


IIS 


against  waste  that  decay  of  faculty  should  imme- 
diately follow  disuse  of  function.  He  that  hath  ears 
to  hear,  he  whose  ears  have  not  degenerated,  let  him 
hear. 

Men  tell  us  sometimes  there  is  no  such  thing  aa 
an  atheist.  There  must  be.  There  are  some  men  to 
whom  it  is  true  that  there  is  no  God.  They  cannot 
see  God  because  they  have  no  eye.  They  have  only 
an  abortive  organ,  atrophied  by  neglects 

All  this,  it  is  commonplace  again  to  insist,  is  not 
the  effect  of  neglect  when  we  die,  but  while  we  live. 
The  process  is  in  full  career  and  operation  now.  It 
is  useless  projecting  consequences  into  the  future 
when  the  effects  may  be  measured  now.  We  are 
always  practising  these  little  deceptions  upon  our- 
selves, postponing  the  consequences  of  our  misdeeds 
as  if  they  were  to  culminate  some  other  day  about 
the  time  of  death.  It  makes  us  sin  with  a lighter 
hand  to  run  an  account  with  retribution,  as  it  were, 
and  delay  the  reckoning  time  with  God.  But  every 
day  is  a reckoning  day.  Every  soul  is  a Book  of 
Judgment,  and  Nature,  as  a recording  angel,  marks 
there  every  sin.  As  all  will  be  judged  by  the  great 
Judge  some  day,  all  are  judged  by  Nature  now.  The 
sin  of  yesterday,  as  part  of  its  penalty,  has  the  sin  of 
to-day.  All  follow  us  in  silent  retribution  on  our 
past,  and  go  with  us  to  the  grave.  We  cannot  cheat 


Ii6 


DEGENERA  TION 


Nature.  No  sleight-of-heart  can  rob  religion  of  a 
present,  the  immortal  nature  of  a now.  The  poet 
sings — 

‘‘  I looked  behind  to  find  my  past, 

And  lo,  it  had  gone  before. 

But  not  all.  The  unforgiven  sins  are  not  away  in 
keeping  somewhere  to  be  let  loose  upon  us  when  we 
die ; they  are  here,  within  us,  now.  To-day  brings 
the  resurrection  of  their  past,  to-morrow  of  to-day. 
And  the  powers  of  sin,  to  the  exact  strength  that  we 
have  developed  them,  nearing  their  dreadful  culmina- 
tion with  every  breath  we  draw,  are  here,  within  us, 
now.  The  souls  of  some  men  are  already  honey- 
combed through  and  through  with  the  eternal  con- 
sequences of  neglect,  so  that  taking  the  natural  and 
rational  view  of  their  case  just  now,  it  is  simply 
inconceivable  that  there  is  any  escape  just  now. 
What  a fearful  thing  it  is  to  fall  into  the  hands  of 
the  living  God ! A fearful  thing  even  if,  as  the 
philosopher  tells  us,  “ the  hands  of  the  Living  God 
are  the  Laws  of  Nature."' 

Whatever  hopes  of  a “ heaven  ” a neglected  soul 
may  have,  can  be  shown  to  be  an  ignorant  and 
delusive  dream.  How  is  the  soul  to  escape  to 
heaven  if  it  has  neglected  for  a lifetime  the  means 
of  escape  from  the  world  and  self.^  And  where  is 
the  capacity  for  heaven  to  come  frcm  if  it  be  not 


DEGENERA  TION, 


117 


developed  on  earth  ? Where,  indeed,  is  even  the 
smallest  spiritual  appreciation  of  God  and  heaven  to 
come  from  when  so  little  of  spirituality  has  ever  been 
known  or  manifested  here  ? If  every  Godward 
aspiration  of  the  soul  has  been  allowed  to  become 
extinct,  and  every  inlet  that  was  open  to  heaven  to 
be  choked,  and  every  talent  for  religious  love  and 
trust  to  have  been  persistently  neglected  and  ignored, 
where  are  the  faculties  to  come  from  that  would  even 
find  the  faintest  relish  in  such  things  as  God  and 
heaven  give  ? 

These  three  words.  Salvation,  Escape,  and  Neglect, 
then,  are  not  casually,  but  organically  and  necessarily 
connected.  Their  doctrine  is  scientific,  not  arbitrary. 
Escape  means  nothing  more  than  the  gradual  emer- 
gence of  the  higher  being  from  the  lower,  and 
nothing  less,  It  means  the  gradual  putting  off  of 
all  that  cannot  enter  the  higher  state,  or  heaven,  and 
simultaneously  the  putting  on  of  Christ  It  involves 
the  slow  completing  of  the  soul  and  the  development 
of  the  capacity  for  God. 

Should  any  one  object  that  from  this  scientific 
standpoint  the  opposite  of  salvation  is  annihilation, 
the  answer  is  at  hand.  From  this  standpoint  there 
is  no  such  word. 

If,  then,  escape  is  to  be  open  to  us,  it  is  not  to 
come  to  us  somehow,  vaguely.  We  are  not  to  hope 


ii8 


DEGENERA  TION. 


for  anything  startling  or  mysterious.  It  is  a definite 
opening  along  certain  lines  which  are  definitely 
marked  by  God,  which  begin  at  the  Cross  of  Christ, 
and  lead  direct  to  Him  Each  man  in  the  silence  of 
his  own  soul  must  work  out  this  salvation  for  himself 
with  fear  and  trembling — with  fear,  realizing  the 
momentous  issues  of  his  task  ; with  trembling,  lest 
before  the  tardy  work  be  done  the  voice  of  Death 
should  summon  him  to  stop. 

What  these  lines  are  may,  in  closing,  be  indicated 
in  a word.  The  true  problem  of  the  spiritual  life 
may  be  said  to  be,  do  the  opposite  of  Neglect. 
Whatever  this  is,  do  it,  and  you  shall  escape.  It  will 
just  mean  that  you  are  so  to  cultivate  the  soul  that 
all  its  powers  will  open  out  to  God,  and  in  beholding 
God  be  drawn  away  from  sin.  The  idea  really  is  to 
develop  among  the  ruins  of  the  old  a new  creature '' 
— a new  creature  which,  while  the  old  is  suffering 
Degeneration  from  Neglect,  is  gradually  to  unfold,  to 
escape  away  and  develop  on  spiritual  lines  to  spiri- 
tual beauty  and  strength.  And  as  our  conception  of 
spiritual  being  must  be  taken  simply  from  natural 
being,  our  ideas  of  the  lines  along  which  the  new 
religious  nature  is  to  run  must  be  borrowed  from  the 
known  lines  of  the  old. 

There  is,  for  example,  a Sense  of  Sight  in  the 
religious  nature.  Neglect  this,  leave  it  undeveloped. 


DEGENERA  TION 


Ilf 

and  yo  : never  miss  it.  You  simply  see  nothing. 
But  develop  it  and  you  see  God.  And  the  line 
along  which  to  develop  it  is  known  to  us.  Become 
pure  in  heart.  The  pure  in  heart  shall  see  God. 
Here,  then,  is  one  opening  for  soul-culture — the 
avenue  through  purity  of  heart  to  the  spiritual  seeing 
of  God. 

Then  there  is  a Sense  of  Sound.  Neglect  this, 
leave  it  undeveloped,  and  you  never  miss  it.  You 
simply  hear  nothing.  Develop  it,  and  you  hear  God. 
And  the  line  along  which  to  develop  it  is  known  to 
us.  Obey  Christ.  Become  one  of  Christ’s  flock. 
‘‘The  sheep  hear  His  voice,  and  He  calleth  them  by 
name.”  Here,  then,  is  another  opportunity  for  the 
culture  of  the  soul — a gateway  through  the  Shep- 
herd’s fold  to  hear  the  Shepherd’s  voice. 

And  there  is  a Sense  of  Touch  to  be  acquired — 
such  a sense  as  the  woman  had  who  touched  the 
hem  of  Christ’s  garment,  that  wonderful  electric 
touch  called  faith,  which  moves  the  very  heart  of 
God. 

And  there  is  a Sense  of  Taste — a spiritual  hunger 
after  God  ; a something  within  which  tastes  and  sees 
that  He  is  good.  And  there  is  the  Talent  for  Inspira- 
tion Neglect  that,  and  all  the  scenery  of  the  spiri- 
tual world  is  flat  and  frozen.  But  cultivate  it,  and 
it  penetrates  the  whole  soul  with  sacred  fire,  and 


ISO 


DEGENERATION. 


illuminates  creation  with  God.  And  last  of  all  there 
is  the  great  capacity  for  Love,  even  for  the  love  of 
God — the  expanding  capacity  for  feeling  more  and 
more  its  height  and  depth,  its  length  and  breadth. 
Till  that  is  felt  no  man  can  really  understand  that 
word,  ‘*so  great  salvation,*^  for  what  is  its  measure 
but  that  other  ‘‘  so  ” of  Christ — God  so  loved  the 
world  that  He  gave  His  only  begotten  Son?  Verily, 
how  shall  we  escape  if  we  neglect  that  ? ^ 

' For  the  scientific  basis  of  this  spiritual  law  the  following 
works  may  be  consulted  . — 

“The  Origin  of  Species.^’  By  Charles  Darwin,  F.R.S, 
London  : John  Murray.  1872. 

“ Degeneration.”  By  E.  Ray  Lankester,  F.R.S.  London  : 
Macn  Ulan.  1880. 

Der  Ursprung  der  Wirbelthiere  und  das  Princip  des  Func- 
tions-Wechsels.”  Dr.  A.  Dorhn.  Leipzig:  1875. 

“ Lessons  from  Nature.”  By  St.  George  ]\Iivart,  F.R.S. 
London  : John  Murray.  1876. 

^The  Natural  Conditions  of  Existence  as  they  Affect  Animal 
Life.'’  Karl  Semper.  London  : C.  Kegan  Paul  & Ca  l88i. 


GROWTH. 


^Is  not  the  evidence  of  Ease  on  the  very  front  of  all  the 
greatest  works  in  existence  ? Do  they  not  say  plainly  to  us^ 
not  ^ there  has  been  a great  effort  here^  but  ‘ there  has  been  a 
great  power  here  * f It  is  not  the  weariness  of  mortality  but 
the  strength  of  divinity^  which  we  have  to  recognise  in  all 
mighty  thmgs ; and  that  is  just  what  we  now  never  recognise^ 
but  think  that  we  are  to  do  great  things  by  help  of  iron  bars 
and  perspiration;  alas  I we  shall  do  nothing  that  way,  but  lose 
sofne  pounds  of  our  own  weight,** 


Ruskin. 


GROWTH. 

“Consider  the  lilies  of  the  field  how  they  giow.^ — 7 hg  Sermon 
m the  Mount 

“ Nunquam  aliud  natura,  aliud  sapientia  dicit ' — Juvenat 

What  gives  the  peculiar  point  to  this  object-lesson 
from  the  lips  of  Jesus  is,  that  He  not  only  made 
the  illustration,  but  made  the  lilies.  It  is  like  an 
inventor  describing  his  own  machine.  He  made  the 
lilies  and  He  made  me — both  on  the  same  broad 
principle.  Both  together,  man  and  flower.  He 
planted  deep  in  the  Providence  of  God ; but  as  men 
are  dull  at  studying  themselves  He  points  to  this 
companion-phenomenon  to  teach  us  how  to  live  a 
free  and  natural  life,  a life  which  God  will  unfold 
for  us,  without  our  anxiety,  as  He  unfolds  the 
flower.  For  Christ’s  words  are  not  a general  appeal 
to  consider  nature.  Men  are  not  to  consider  the 
lilies  simply  to  admire  their  beauty,  to  dream  over 
the  delicate  strength  and  grace  of  stem  and  leaf. 
The  point  they  were  to  consider  was  how  they  grew 
— how  without  anxiety  or  care  the  flower  woke 


124 


GROWTH, 


into  loveliness,  how  without  weaving  these  leaves 
were  woven,  how  without  toiling  these  complex 
tissues  spun  themselves,  and  how  without  any  effort 
or  friction  the  whole  slowly  came  ready-made  from 
the  loom  of  God  in  its  more  than  Solomon-like 
glory.  ‘ So,*  He  says,  making  the  application 
beyond  dispute,  ‘ you  care-worn,  anxious  men 
must  grow.  You,  too,  need  take  no  thought  for 
your  life,  what  ye  shall  eat  or  what  ye  shall  drink 
or  what  ye  shall  put  on.  For  if  God  so  clothe  the 
grass  of  the  field,  which  to-day  is,  and  to-morrow 
is  cast  into  the  oven,  shall  He  not  much  more  clothe 
you,  O ye  of  little  faith  ? * ^ 

This  nature-lesson  was  a great  novelty  in  its  day ; 
but  all  men  now  who  have  even  a ‘‘  little  faith  **  have 
learned  this  Christian  secret  of  a composed  life. 
Apart  even  from  the  parable  of  the  lily,  the  failures 
of  the  past  have  taught  most  of  us  the  folly  of  dis- 
quieting ourselves  in  vain,  and  we  have  given  up 
the  idea  that  by  taking  thought  we  can  add  a cubit 
to  our  stature. 

But  no  sooner  has  our  life  settled  down  to  this 
calm  trust  in  God  than  a new  and  graver  anxiety 
begins^  This  time  it  is  not  for  the  body  we  are 
in  travail,  but  for  the  soul.  For  the  temporal  life 
we  have  considered  the  lilies,  but  how  is  the 
spiritual  life  to  grow  i How  are  we  to  become 


GROWTH, 


125 


better  men  ? How  are  we  to  grow  in  grace  ? By 
what  thought  shall  we  add  the  cubits  to  the  spiritual 
stature  and  reach  the  fulness  pf  the  Perfect  Man  ? 
And  because  we  know  ill  how  to  do  this,  the  old 
anxiety  comes  back  again  and  our  inner  life  is  once 
more  an  agony  of  conflict  and  remorse.  After  all, 
we  have  but  transferred  our  anxious  thoughts  from 
the  body  to  the  soul.  Our  efforts  after  Christian 
growth  seem  only  a succession  of  failures,  and  in 
stead  of  rising  into  the  beauty  of  holiness  our  life 
is  a daily  heartbreak  and  humiliation. 

Now  the  reason  of  this  is  very  plain.  We  have 
forgotten  the  parable  of  the  lily.  Violent  efforts 
to  grow  are  right  in  earnestness,  but  wholly  wrong 
in  principle.  There  is  but  one  principle  of  growth 
both  for  the  natural  and  spiritual,  for  animal  and 
plant,  for  body  and  soul.  For  all  growth  is  an 
organic  thing.  And  the  principle  of  growing  in 
grace  is  once  more  this,  ‘‘  Consider  the  lilies  how 
they  growy 

In  seeking  to  extend  the  analogy  from  the  body  to 
the  soul  there  are  two  things  about  the  lilies'  growth, 
two  characteristics  of  all  growth,  on  which  one  must 
fix  attention.  These  are, — 

First,  Spontaneousness. 

Second,  Mysteriousness. 

I.  Spontaneousness.  There  are  three  lines  along 


£26 


GROWTH. 


which  one  may  seek  for  evidence  of  the  spontaneous- 
ness of  growth.  The  first  is  Science.  And  the 
argument  here  could  not  be  summed  up  better  than 
in  the  words  of  Jesus.  The  lilies  grow,  He  says, 
of  themselves  ; they  toil  not,  neither  do  they  spin. 
They  grow,  that  is,  automatically,  spontaneously, 
without  trying,  without  fretting,  without  thinking. 
Applied  in  any  direction,  to  plant,  to  animal,  to 
the  body  or  to  the  soul  this  law  holds.  A boy 
grows,  for  example,  without  trying.  One  or  two 
simple  conditions  are  fulfilled,  and  the  growth  goes 
on.  He  thinks  probably  as  little  about  the  con- 
dition as  about  the  result ; he  fulfils  the  conditions 
by  habit,  the  result  follows  by  nature.  Both  pro- 
cesses go  steadily  on  from  year  to  year  apart  from 
himself  and  all  but  in  spite  of  himself.  One  would 
never  think  of  tellmg  a boy  to  grow.  A doctor  has 
no  prescription  for  growth.  He  can  tell  me  how 
growth  may  be  stunted  or  impaired,  but  the  process 
itself  is  recognised  as  beyond  control — one  of  the 
few,  and  therefore  very  significant,  things  which 
Nature  keeps  in  her  own  hands.  No  physician  of 
souls,  in  like  manner,  has  any  prescription  for 
spiritual  growth.  It  is  the  question  he  is  most 
often  asked  and  most  often  answers  wrongly.  He 
may  prescribe  more  earnestness,  more  prayer,  more 
self-denial,  or  more  Christian  work.  These  are  pre- 


GROWTH, 


127 


scriptions  for  something,  but  not  for  growth.  Not 
that  they  may  not  encourage  growth ; but  the  soul 
grows  as  the  lily  grows,  without  trying,  without 
fretting,  without  ever  thinking.  Manuals  of  devotion, 
with  complicated  rules  for  getting  on  in  the 
Christian  life,  would  do  well  sometimes  to  return 
to  the  simplicity  of  nature  ; and  earnest  souls  who 
are  attempting  sanctification  by  struggle  instead  of 
santification  by  faith  might  be  spared  much  humili- 
ation by  learning  the  botany  of  the  Sermon  on  the 
Mount.  There  can  indeed  be  no  other  principle  of 
growth  than  this.  It  is  a vital  act.  And  to  try  to 
make  a thing  grow  is  as  absurd  as  to  help  the  tide 
to  come  in  or  the  sun  rise. 

Another  argument  for  the  spontaneousness  of 
growth  is  universal  experience.  A boy  not  only 
grows  without  trying,  but  he  cannot  grow  if  he 
tries.  No  man  by  taking  thought  has  ever  added 
a cubit  to  his  stature ; nor  has  any  man  by  mere 
working  at  his  soul  ever  approached  nearer  to  the 
stature  of  the  Lord  Jesus.  The  stature  of  the 
Lord  Jesus  was  not  itself  reached  by  work,  and 
he  who  thinks  to  approach  its  mystical  height  bv 
anxious  effort  is  really  receding  from  it.  Christ’s 
life  unfolded  itself  from  a divine  germ,  planted 
centrally  in  His  nature,  which  grew  as  naturally  as 
a flower  from  a bud.  This  flower  may  be  imitated  \ 


128 


GROWTH, 


but  one  can  always  tell  an  artificial  flower.  The 
human  form  may  be  copied  in  wax,  yet  somehow 
one  never  fails  to  detect  the  difference.  And  this 
precisely  is  the  difference  between  a native  growth 
of  Christian  principle  and  the  moral  copy  of  it. 
The  one  is  natural,  the  other  mechanical.  The 
one  is  a growth,  the  other  an  accretion.  Now  this, 
according  to  modern  biology,  is  the  fundamental 
distinction  between  the  living  and  the  not  living, 
• between  an  organism  and  a crystal.  The  living 
organism  grows,  the  dead  crystal  increases.  The 
first  grows  vitally  from  within,  the  last  adds  new 
particles  from  the  outside.  The  whole  difference  be- 
tween the  Christian  and  the  moralist  lies  here.  The 
Christian  works  from  the  centre,  the  moralist  from 
the  circumference.  The  one  is  an  organism,  in  the 
centre  of  which  is  planted  by  the  living  God  a 
living  germ.  The  other  is  a crystal,  very  beautiful 
it  may  be ; but  only  a crystal — it  wants  the  vital 
principle  of  growth. 

And  one  sees  here  also,  what  is  sometimes  very 
difficult  to  see,  why  salvation  in  the  first  instance 
is  never  connected  directly  with  morality.  The 
reason  is  not  that  salvation  does  not  demand 
morality,  but  that  it  demands  so  much  of  it  that 
the  moralist  can  never  reach  up  to  it.  The  end  of 
Salvation  is  perfection,  the  Christlike  mind,  character 


GROWTH. 


129 


and  life.  Morality  is  on  the  way  to  this  perfection  : 
it  may  go  a considerable  distance  towards  it,  but 
it  can  never  reach  it.  Only  Life  can  do  that.  It 
ro(iuires  something  with  enormous  power  of  move- 
ment, of  growth,  of  overcoming  obstacles,  to  attain 
the  perfect.  Therefore  the  man  who  has  within 
himself  this  great  formative  agent,  Life,  is  nearer 
the  end  than  the  man  who  has  morality  alone. 
The  latter  can  never  reach  perfection ; the  former 
must.  For  the  Life  must  develop  out  according  to 
its  type  ; and  being  a germ  of  the  Christ-life,  it 
must  unfold  into  a Christ.  Morality,  at  the  utmost, 
only  develops  the  character  in  one  or  two  direc- 
tions. It  may  perfect  a single  virtue  here  and 
there,  but  it  cannot  perfect  all.  And  especially  it 
fails  always  to  give  that  rounded  harmony  of  parts, 
that  perfect  tune  to  the  whole  orchestra,  which  is 
the  marked  characteristic  of  life.  Perfect  life  is 
not  merely  the  possessing  of  perfect  functions,  but 
of  perfect  functions  perfectly  adjusted  to  each  other 
and  all  conspiring  to  a single  result,  the  perfect 
working  of  the  whole  organism.  It  is  not  said 
that  the  character  will  develop  in  all  its  fulness  in 
this  life.  That  were  a time  too  short  for  an  Evolu- 
tion so  magnificent.  In  this  world  only  the  corn- 
less ear  is  seen  ; sometimes  only  the  small  yet  still 
prophetic  blade.  The  sneer  at  the  godly  man  for 


K 


130 


GROWTH. 


his  imperfections  is  ill-judged.  A blade  is  a small 
thing.  At  first  it  grows  very  near  the  earth.  It  is 
often  soiled  and  crushed  and  downtrodden.  But  it 
is  a living  thing.  That  great  dead  stone  beside  it 
is  more  imposing ; only  it  will  never  be  anything 
else  than  a stone.  But  this  small  blade — it  doth 
not  yet  appear  what  it  shall  be. 

Seeing  now  that  Growth  can  only  be  synonymous 
with  a living  automatic  process,  it  is  all  but  super- 
fluous to  seek  a third  line  of  argument  from  Scrip- 
ture. Growth  there  is  always  described  in  the 
language  of  physiology.  The  regenerate  soul  is  a 
new  creature.  The  Christian  is  a new  man  in 
Christ  Jesus.  He  adds  the  cubits  to  his  stature 
just  as  the  old  man  does.  He  is  rooted  and  built 
up  in  Christ ; he  abides  in  the  vine,  and  so  abiding, 
not  toiling  or  spinning,  brings  forth  fruit.  The 
Christian  in  short,  like  the  poet,  is  born  not  made  ; 
and  the  fruits  of  his  character  are  not  manufactured 
things  but  living  things,  things  which  have  grown 
from  the  secret  germ,  the  fruits  of  the  living  Spirit 
They  are  not  the  produce  of  this  climate,  but 
exotics  from  a sunnier  land. 

II.  But,  secondly,  besides  this  Spontaneousness 
there  is  this  other  great  characteristic  of  Growth — 
Mysteriousness.  Upon  this  quality  depends  the  fact^ 
probably,  that  so  few  men  ever  fathom  its  real 


GROWTH. 


13a 


character.  We  are  most  unspiritual  always  in  deal- 
ing with  the  simplest  spiritual  things.  A lily  grows 
mysteriously,  pushing  up  its  solid  weight  of  stem 
and  leaf  in  the  teeth  of  gravity.  Shaped  into 
beauty  by  secret  and  invisible  fingers,  the  flower 
develops  we  know  not  how.  But  we  do  not  wonder 
at  it.  Every  day  the  thing  is  done  ; it  is  Nature,  it 
is  God.  We  are  spiritual  enough  at  least  to  under- 
stand that.  But  when  the  soul  rises  slowly  above 
the  world,  pushing  up  its  delicate  virtues  in  the  teeth 
of  sin,  shaping  itself  niysteriously  into  the  image 
of  Christ,  we  deny  that  the  power  is  not  of  man. 
A strong  will,  we  say,  a high  ideal,  the  reward  of 
virtue,  Christian  influence, — these  will  account  for  it. 
Spiritual  character  is  merely  the  product  of  anxious 
work,  self-command,  and  self-denial.  We  allow,  that 
is  to  say,  a miracle  to  the  lily,  but  none  to  the  man. 
The  lily  may  grow;  the  man  must  fret  ana  coil  and 
spin. 

Now  grant  for  a moment  that  by  hard  work  and 
self-restraint  a man  may  attain  to  a very  high 
character.  It  is  not  denied  that  this  can  be  done. 
But  what  is  denied  is  that  this  is  growth,  and  that 
this  process  is  Christianity.  The  fact  that  you  can 
account  for  it  proves  that  it  is  not  growth.  For 
growth  is  mysterious  ; the  peculiarity  of  it  is  that 
you  cannot  account  for  it  Mysteriousness,  as 


13* 


GROWTH. 


Mozley  has  well  observed,  is  ‘‘the  test  of  spiritual 
birth/'  And  this  was  Christ’s  test  “ The  wind 
bloweth  where  it  listeth.  Thou  hearest  the  sound 
thereof,  but  canst  not  tell  whence  it  cometh  or 
whither  it  goeth,  so  is  every  07te  that  is  born  of  the 
Spiritr  The  test  of  spirituality  is  that  you  cannot 
tell  whence  it  cometh  or  whither  it  goeth.  If  you 
can  tell,  if  you  can  account  for  it  on  philosophical 
principles,  on  the  doctrine  of  influence,  on  strength 
of  will,  on  a favourable  environment,  it  is  not  growth. 
It  may  be  so  far  a success,  it  may  be  a perfectly 
honest,  even  remarkable,  and  praiseworthy  imitation, 
but  it  is  not  the  real  thing.  The  fruits  are  wax,  the 
flowers  artificial — you  can  tell  whence  it  cometh  and 
whither  it  goeth. 

The  conclusion  is,  then,  that  the  Christian  is  a unique 
phenomenon.  You  cannot  account  for  him.  And  if 
you  coulG  he  would  not  be  a Christian.  Mozley  has 
drawn  the  two  characters  for  us  in  graphic  words : 
“Take  an  ordinary  man  of  the  world — what  he 
thinks  and  what  he  does,  his  whole  standard  of  duty 
is  taken  from  the  society  in  which  he  lives.  It  is  a 
borrowed  standard  : he  is  as  good  as  other  people 
3.J  e ’ he  does,  in  the  way  of  duty,  what  is  generally 
considered  proper  and  becoming  among  those  with 
whom  his  lot  is  thrown.  He  reflects  established 
opinion  on  such  points.  He  follows  its  lead.  His 


GROWTH, 


133 


aims  and  objects  in  life  again  are  taken  from  the 
world  around  him,  and  from  its  dictation.  What  it 
considers  honourable,  worth  having,  advantageous 
and  good,  he  thinks  so  too  and  pursues  it.  His 
motives  all  come  from  a visible  quarter.  It  would  be 
absurd  to  say  that  there  is  any  mystery  in  such  a 
character  as  this,  because  it  is  formed  from  a known 
external  influence — the  influence  of  social  opinion 
and  the  voice  of  the  world.  ‘ Whence  such  a char- 
acter cometh  * we  see  ; we  venture  to  say  that  the 
source  and  origin  of  it  is  open  and  palpable,  and  we 
know  it  just  as  we  know  the  physical  causes  of  many 
common  facts.^^ 

Then  there  is  the  other.  ‘‘There  is  a certain 
character  and  disposition  of  mind  of  which  it  is  true 
to  say  that  ‘ thou  can^t  not  tell  whence  it  cometh  or 
whither  it  goeth.’  . . . There  are  those  who  stand 

out  from  among  the  crowd,  which  reflects  merely  the 
atmosphere  of  feeling  and  standard  of  society  around 
it,  with  an  impress  upon  them  which  bespeaks  a 
heavenly  birth.  . . , Now,  when  we  see  one  of 

those  characters,  it  is  a question  which  we  ask  our- 
selves, How  has  the  person  become  possessed  of  it } 
Has  he  caught  it  from  society  aiyund  him  > That 
cannot  be,  because  it  is  wholly  different  from  that 
of  the  world  around  him.  Has  he  caught  it  from 
the  inoculation  of  crowds  and  masses,  as  the  mere 


^34 


GROWTH. 


religious  zealot  catches  his  character?  That  cannot 
be  either,  for  the  type  is  altogether  different  from 
that  which  masses  of  men,  under  enthusiastic  impulses^ 
exhibit.  There  is  nothing  gregarious  in  this  char- 
acter ; it  is  the  individual’s  own  ; it  is  not  borrowed, 
it  is  not  a reflection  of  any  fashion  or  tone  of  the 
world  outside;  it  rises  up  from  some  fount  within, 
and  it  is  a creation  of  which  the  text  says,  VVe  know 
not  whence  it  cometh.’’^ 

Now  we  have  all  met  these  two  characters — the 
one  eminently  respectable,  upright,  virtuous,  a trifle 
cold  perhaps,  and  generally,  when  critically  examined, 
revealing  somehow  the  mark  of  the  tool ; the  other 
with  God’s  breath  still  upon  it,  an  inspiration  ; not 
more  virtuous,  but  differently  virtuous  ; not  more 
humble,  but  different,  wearing  the  meek  and  quiet 
spirit  artlessly  as  to  the  manner  born.  The  other- 
worldliness of  such  a character  is  the  thing  that  strikes 
you  ; you  are  not  prepared  for  what  it  will  do  or  say 
or  become  next,  for  it  moves  from  a far-off  centre,  and 
in  spite  of  its  transparency  and  sweetness,  that  pre- 
sence fills  you  always  with  awe.  A man  never  feels 
I he  discord  of  his  own  life,  never  hears  the  jar  of  th^» 
machinery  by  which  he  tries  to  manufacture  his  own 
good  points,  till  he  has  stood  in  the  stillness  of  such 


' University  Sermons,  pp.  234-241. 


GROWTH. 


135 


a presence.  Then  he  discerns  the  difference  between 
growth  and  work.  He  has  considered  the  lilies,  how 
they  grow. 

We  have  now  seen  that  spiritual  growth  is  a 
process  maintained  and  secured  by  a spontaneous 
and  mysterious  inward  principle.  It  is  a spontan- 
eous principle  even  in  its  origin,  for  it  bloweth  where 
it  listeth  ; mysterious  in  its  operation,  for  we  can 
never  tell  whence  it  cometh  ; obscure  in  its  destina- 
tion, for  we  cannot  tell  whence  it  goeth.  The  whole 
process  tlierefore  transcends  us  ; we  do  not  work,  we 
are  taken  in  hand — “ it  is  God  which  worketh  in  us, 
both  to  will  and  to  do  of  His  good  pleasure.”  We 
do  not  plan — we  are  ‘‘created  in  Christ  Jesus  unto 
good  works,  which  God  hath  before  ordained  that 
we  should  walk  in  them.” 

There  may  be  an  obvious  objection  to  all  this.  It 
takes  away  all  conflict  from  the  Christian  life?  It 
makes  man,  does  it  not,  mere  clay  in  the  hands  of 
the  potter } It  crushes  the  old  character  to  make 
a new  one,  and  destroys  man’s  responsibility  for  his 
own  soul  ? 

Now  we  are  not  concerned  here  in  once  more 
striking  the  time-honoured  “balance  between  faith 
and  works.”  We  are  considering  how  lilies  grow, 
and  in  a specific  connection,  namely,  to  discover  the 
attitude  of  mind  which  the  Christian  should  preserve 


GROWTH. 


136 

regarding  his  spiritual  growth.  That  attitude,  pri- 
marily, is  to  be  free  from  care.  We  are  not  lodging 
a plea  for  inactivity  of  the  spiritual  energies,  but  for 
the  tranquillity  of  the  spiritual  mind.  Christ's  protest 
is  not  against  work,  but  against  anxious  thought} 
and  rather,  therefore,  than  complement  the  lesson 
by  showing  the  other  side,  we  take  the  risk  of  still 
further  extending  the  plea  in  the  original  direction. 

What  is  the  relation,  to  recur  again  to  analogy, 
between  growth  and  work  in  a boy  ? Consciously, 
there  is  no  relation  at  all.  • The  boy  never  thinks  of 
connecting  his  work  with  his  growth.  Work  in  fact 
is  one  thing  and  growth  another,  and  it  is  so  in  the 
spiritual  life.  If  it  be  asked  therefore,  Is  the  Chris- 
tian wrong  in  these  ceaseless  and  agonizing  efforts 
after  growth  t the  answer  is,  Yes,  he  is  quite  wrong, 
or  at  least,  he  is  quite  mistaken.  When  a boy  takes 
a meal  or  denies  himself  indigestible  things,  he  does 
not  say,  All  this  will  minister  to  my  growth " ; or 
when  he  runs  a race  he  does  not  say,  “This  will 
help  the  next  cubit  of  my  stature."  It  may  or  it 
may  not  be  true  that  these  things  will  help  his 
stature,  but,  if  he  thinks  of  this,  his  idea  of  growth 
is  morbid.  And  this  is  the  point  we  are  dealing 
with.  His  anxietjrhere  is  altogether  irrelevant  and 
superfluous.  Nature  is  far  more  bountiful  than  we 
think.  When  she  gives  us  energy  she  asks  none 


GROWTH. 


*37 


of  It  back  to  expend  on  our  own  growth.  She  will 
attend  to  that.  Give  your  work,”  she  says,  and 
your  anxiety  to  others  ; trust  me  to  add  the  cubits 
to  your  stature.”  If  God  is  adding  to  our  spiritual 
stature,  unfolding  the  new  nature  within  us,  it  is 
a mistake  to  keep  twitching  at  the  petals  with  our 
coarse  fingers.  We  must  seek  to  let  the  Creative 
Hand  alone.  “ It  is  God  which  giveth  the  increase.” 
Yet  we  never  know  how  little  we  have  learned  of  the 
fundamental  principle  of  Christianity  till  we  discover 
how  much  we  are  all  bent  on  supplementing  God's 
free  grace.  If  God  is  spending  work  upon  a Chris- 
tian, let  him  be  still  and  know  that  it  is  God.  And 
if  he  wants  work,  he  will  find  it  there — in  the  being 
still. 

Not  that  there  is  no  work  for  him  who  would 
grow,  to  do.  There  is  work,  and  severe  work, — 
work  so  great  that  the  worker  deserves  to  have 
himself  relieved  of  all  that  is  superfluous  during  his 
task.  If  the  amount  of  energy  lost  in  trying  to  grow 
were  spent  in  fulfilling  rather  the  conditions  of 
growth,  we  should  have  many  more  cubits  to  show 
for  our  stature.  It  is  with  these  conditions  that  the 
personal  work  of  the  Christian  is  chiefly  concerned. 
Observe  for  a moment  what  they  are,  and  their 
exact  relation.  For  its  growth  the  plant  needs  heat, 
light,  air,  and  moisture.  A man,  therefore,  must  go 


138 


GROWTH. 


in  search  of  these,  or  their  spiritual  equiv'-alents,  and 
this  is  his  work  ? By  no  means.  The  Christian’s 
work  is  not  yet.  Does  the  plant  go  in  search  of  its 
conditions  } Nay,  the  conditions  come  to  the  plant. 
It  no  more  manufactures  the  heat,  light,  air,  and 
moisture,  than  it  manufactures  its  own  stem.  It 
finds  them  all  around  it  in  Nature.  It  simply  stands 
still  with  its  leaves  spread  out  in  unconscious  prayer, 
and  Nature  lavishes  upon  it  these  and  all  other 
bounties,  bathing  it  in  sunshine,  pouring  the  nourish- 
ing air  over  and  over  it,  reviving  it  graciously  with 
its  nightly  dew.  Grace,  too,  is  as  free  as  the  air. 
The  Lord  God  is  a Sun.  He  is  as  the  Dew  to  Israel. 
A man  has  no  more  to  manufacture  these  than 
he  has  to  manufacture  his  own  soul.  He  stands 
surrounded  by  them,  bathed  in  them,  beset  behind 
and  before  by  them.  He  lives  and  moves  and  has 
his  being  in  them.  How  then  shall  he  go  in  search 
of  them  ? Do  not  they  rather  go  in  search  of  him  } 
Does  he  not  feel  how  they  press  themselves  upon 
him?  Does  he  not  know  how  unweariedly  they  appeal 
to  him  ? Has  he  not  heard  how  they  are  sorrowful 
when  he  will  not  have  them  } His  work,  therefore, 
is  not  yet  The  voice  still  says,  Be  still.” 

The  conditions  of  growth,  then,  and  the  inward 
principle  of  growth  being  both  supplied  by  Nature, 
the  thing  man  has  to  do,  the  little  junction  left  for 


GROWTH. 


m 


him  to  complete,  is  to  apply  the  one  to  the  other. 
He  manufactures  nothing ; he  earns  nothing ; he 
need  be  anxious  for  nothing ; his  one  duty  Is  lo  b6 
in  these  conditions,  to  abide  in  them.,  to  allow  grace 
to  play  over  him,  to  be  still  therein  and  know  that 
this  is  God. 

The  conflict  begins  and  prevails  in  all  its  life-long 
agony  the  moment  a man  forgets  this.  He  struggles 
to  grow  himself  instead  of  struggling  to  get  back 
again  into  position.  He  makes  the  church  into  a 
workshop  when  God  meant  it  to  be  a beautiful 
garden.  And  even  in  his  closet,  where  only  should 
reign  silence — a silence  as  of  the  mountains  whereon 
the  lilies  grow — is  heard  the  roar  and  tumult  of  ma- 
chinery. True,  a man  will  often  have  to  wrestle  with 
his  God — but  not  for  growth.  The  Christian  life  is 
a composed  life.  The  Gospel  is  Peace.  Yet  the 
most  anxious  people  in  the  world  are  Christians — 
Christians  who  misunderstand  the  nature  of  growth. 
Life  is  a perpetual  self-condemning  because  they  are 
not  growing.  And  the  effect  is  not  only  the  loss  of 
tranquillity  to  the  individual.  The  energies  which 
are  meant  to  be  spent  on  the  work  of  Christ  are 
consumed  in  the  souks  own  fever.  So  long  as  the 
Church’s  activities  are  spent  on  growing  there  is 
nothing  to  spare  for  the  world.  A soldier’s  time  is 
not  spent  in  earning  the  money  to  buy  his  armour,  in 


140 


GROWTH. 


finding  food  and  raiment,  in  seeking  shelter*  His 
king  provides  these  things  that  he  may  be  the  more 
at  liberty  to  fight  his  battles.  So,  for  the  soldier  of 
the  Cross  all  is  provided.  His  Government  has 
planned  to  leave  him  free  for  the  Kingdom's  work. 

The  problem  of  the  Christian  life  finally  is  sim- 
plified to  this — man  has  but  to  preserve  the  right 
attitude.  To  abide  in  Christ,  to  be  in  position,  that 
is  all.  Much  work  is  done  on  board  a ship  crossing 
the  Atlantic.  Yet  none  of  it  is  spent  on  making  the 
ship  go.  The  sailor  but  harnesses  his  vessel  to  the 
wind.  He  puts  his  sail  and  rudder  in  position,  and 
lo,  the  miracle  is  wrought  So  everywhere  God 
creates,  man  utilizes.  All  the  work  of  the  world  is 
merely  a taking  advantage  of  energies  already  there.^ 
God  gives  the  wind,  and  the  water,  and  the  heat ; 
man  but  puts  himself  in  the  way  of  the  wind,  fixes 
his  water-wheel  in  the  way  of  the  river,  puts  his 
piston  in  the  way  of  the  steam  ; and  so  holding  him- 
self in  position  before  God's  Spirit,  all  the  energies  of 
Omnipotence  course  within  his  soul.  He  is  like  a 
tree  planted  by  a river  whose  leaf  is  green  and  whose 
fruits  fail  not  Such  is  the  deeper  lesson  to  be 
learned  from  considering  the  lily.  It  is  the  voice  of 
Nature  echoing  the  whole  evangel  of  Jesus,  " Come 
unto  Me,  and  I will  give  you  rest” 


^ See  BushnelPs  “New  Life.^ 


DEATH, 


^ What  could  be  easier  them  to  form  a catena  of  the  most 
philosophical  defenders  of  Christianity^  who  have  exhausted 
language  in  declanng  the  impotence  of  the  unassisted  intel- 
lect f Comte  has  not  more  explicitly  enounced  the  incapacity 
of  ma?t  to  deal  with  the  Absolute  and  the  Inji7iite  than  the 
whole  series  of  orthodox  writers » Trust  your  reason^  we  have 
been  told  till  we  are  tired  of  the  phrase^  and  you  will  become 
Atheists  or  Agnostics,  IVe  take  you  at  your  word j we 
beco7ne  Agnostics” 


Leslie  Siephen, 


DEATH. 


•*  To  be  carnally  minded  is  Death.” — Paul, 

“ I do  not  wonder  at  what  men  suffer,  but  I wonder  often 
at  what  they  lose.” — Ruskin. 

Death/’  wrote  Faber,  “ is  an  unsurveyed  land,  an 
unarranged  Science.”  Poetry  draws  near  Death 
only  to  hover  over  it  for  a moment  and  withdraw 
in  terror.  History  knows  it  simply  as  a universal 
fact.  Philosophy  finds  it  among  the  mysteries  of 
being,  the  one  great  mystery  of  being  not.  All 
contributions  to  this  dread  theme  are  marked  by 
an  essential  vagueness,  and  every  avenue  of  approach 
seems  darkened  by  impenetrable  shadow. 

But  modern  Biology  has  found  it  part  of  its  work 
to  push  its  v/ay  into  this  silent  land,  and  at  last 
the  world  is  confronted  with  a scientific  treatment 
of  Death.  Not  that  much  is  added  to  the  old 
conception,  or  much  taken  from  it.  What  it  is,  this 
certain  Death  with  its  uncertain  issues,  we  know 
as  little  as  before.  But  we  can  define  more  clearly 
and  attach  a narrower  meaning  to  the  momentous 
symbol 


DEATH. 


144 

The  interest  of  the  investigation  here  lies  in 
the  fact  that  Death  is  one  of  the  outstanding  things 
in  Nature  which  has  an  acknowledged  spiritual 
equivalent.  The  prominence  of  the  woid  in  the 
vocabulary  of  Revelation  cannot  be  exaggerated. 
Next  to  Life  the  most  pregnant  symbol  in  religion 
is  its  antithesis,  Death.  And  from  the  time  that 
“ If  thou  eatest  thereof  thou  shalt  surely  die  was 
heard  in  Paradise,  this  solemn  word  has  been  linked 
with  human  interests  of  eternal  moment. 

Notwithstanding  the  unparalleled  emphasis  upon 
this  term  in  the  Christian  system,  there  is  none 
more  feebly  expressive  to  the  ordinary  mind.  That 
mystery  which  surrounds  the  word  in  the  natural 
world  shrouds  only  too  completely  its  spiritual  im- 
port. The  reluctance  which  prevents  men  from 
investigating  the  secrets  of  the  King  of  Terrors  is 
for  a certain  length  entitled  to  respect.  But  it  has 
left  theology  with  only  the  vaguest  materials  to 
construct  a doctrine  which,  intelligently  enforced, 
ought  to  appeal  to  all  men  with  convincing  power 
and  lend  the  most  effective  argument  to  Christianity. 
Whatever  may  have  been  its  influence  in  the  past, 
Its  threat  is  gone  for  the  modern  world.  The  word 
has  grown  weak.  Ignorance  has  robbed  the  Grave 
of  all  its  terror,  and  platitude  despoilt  Death  oi 
its  sting.  Death  itself  is  ethically  dead.  Which 


DEATH. 


145 


of  US,  for  example,  enters  fully  into  the  meaning 
of  words  like  these  : “ She  that  liveth  in  pleasure 
is  dead  while  she  liveth  ” ? Who  allows  adequate 
weight  to  the  metaphor  in  the  Pauline  phrase, 
‘*To  be  carnally  minded  is  Death;''  or  in  this, 
“ The  wages  of  sin  is  Death " ? Or  what  theology 
has  translated  into  the  language  of  human  life  the 
terrific  practical  import  of  “Dead  in  trespasses  and 
sins  ? To  seek  to  make  these  phrases  once  more 
real  and  burning  ; to  clothe  time-worn  formulae  with 
living  truth  ; to  put  the  deepest  ethical  meaning  into 
the  gravest  symbol  of  Nature,  and  fill  up  with  its 
full  consequence  the  darkest  threat  of  Revelation — 
these  are  the  objects  before  us  now. 

What,  then,  is  Death?  Is  it  possible  to  define 
it  and  embody  its  essential  meaning  in  an  intelli- 
gible proposition  ? 

The  most  recent  and  the  most  scientific  attempt 
to  investigate  Death  we  owe  to  the  biological  studies 
of  Mr.  Herbert  Spencer.  In  his  search  for  the 
meaning  of  Life  the  word  Death  crosses  his  path, 
and  he  turns  aside  for  a moment  to  define  it.  Of 
course  what  Death  is  depends  upon  what  Life  is. 
Mr.  Herbert  Spencer’s  definition  of  Life,  it  is  well 
known,  has  been  subjected  to  serious  criticism. 
While  it  has  shed  much  light  on  many  of  the 
phenomena  of  Life,  it  cannot  be  affirmed  that  it 


L 


146 


DEATH, 


has  taken  its  place  in  science  as  the  final  solution 
of  the  fundamental  problem  of  biology.  No  defi- 
nition of  Life,  indeed,  that  has  yet  appeared  can 
be  said  to  be  even  approximately  correct.  Its 
mysterious  quality  evades  us  ; and  we  have  to  be 
content  with  outward  characteristics  and  accom- 
paniments, leaving  the  thing  itself  an  unsolved 
riddle.  At  the  same  time  Mr.  Herbert  Spencer’s 
masterly  elucidation  of  the  chief  phenomena  of 
Life  has  placed  philosophy  and  science  under  many 
obligations,  and  in  the  paragraphs  which  follow  we 
shall  have  to  incur  a further  debt  on  behalf  of 
religion. 

The  meaning  of  Death  depending,  as  has  been 
said,  on  the  meaning  of  Life,  we  must  first  set 
ourselves  to  grasp  the  leading  characteristics  which 
distinguish  living  things.  To  a physiologist  the 
living  organism  is  distinguished  from  the  not-living 
by  the  performance  of  certain  functions.  These 
functions  are  four  in  number — Assimilation,  Waste 
Reproduction,  and  Growth.  Nothing  could  be  a 
more  interesting  task  than  to  point  out  the  co- 
relatives of  these  in  the  spiritual  sphere,  to  show 
in  what  ways  the  discharge  of  these  functions 
represent  the  true  manifestations  of  spiritual  life, 
and  how  the  failure  to  perform  them  constitutes 
spiritual  Death.  But  it  will  bring  us  more  directly 


DEATH. 


147 


to  the  specific  subject  before  us  if  we  follow  rather 
the  newer  biological  lines  of  Mr.  Herbert  Spencer, 
According  to  his  definition,  Life  is  “ The  definite 
combination  of  heterogeneous  changes,  both  simub 
taneous  and  successive,  in  correspondence  with  ex- 
ternal co-existences  and  sequences,’*  ^ or  more  shortly 
“The  continuous  adjustment  of  internal  relations 
to  external  relations.”^  An  example  or  two  will 
render  these  important  statements  at  once  intelli- 
gible. 

The  essential  characteristic  of  a living  organism, 
according  to  these  definitions,  is  that  it  is  in  vital 
connection  with  its  general  surroundings.  A human 
being,  for  instance,  is  in  direct  contact  with  the  earth 
and  air,  with  all  surrounding  things,  with  the  warmth 
of  the  sun,  with  the  music  of  birds,  with  the  count- 
less influences  and  activities  of  nature  and  of  his 
fellow-men.  In  biological  language  he  is  said  thus 
to  be  “in  correspondence  with  his  environment.”  He 
is,  that  is  to  say,  in  active  and  vital  connection  with 
them,  influencing  them  possibly,  but  especially  being 
influenced  by  them.  Now  it  is  in  virtue  of  this 
correspondence  that  he  is  entitled  to  be  called  alive. 
So  long  as  he  is  in  correspondence  with  any  given 
point  of  his  environment,  he  lives.  To  keep  up 


* ^ Principles  of  Biology,*'  vol.  i.  p.  74. 


* Ibid 


14S 


DEATH. 


this  correspondence  is  to  keep  up  life.  If  his  en 
yironment  changes  he  must  instantly  adjust  himseil 
to  the  change.  And  he  continues  living  only  as  long 
as  he  succeeds  in  adjusting  himself  to  the  ‘'simulta- 
neous and  successive  changes  in  his  environment  as 
these  occur.  What  is  meant  by  a change  in  his 
environment  may  be  understood  from  an  example, 
which  will  at  the  same  time  define  more  clearly 
the  intimacy  of  the  relation  between  environment 
and  organism.  Let  us  take  the  case  of  a civil-ser- 
vant whose  environment  is  a district  in  India.  It 
is  a region  subject  to  occasional  and  prolonged 
droughts  resulting  in  periodical  famines.  W^ien  such 
a period  of  scarcity  arises,  he  proceeds  immediately 
to  adjust  himself  to  this  external  change.  Having 
the  power  of  locomotion,  he  may  remove  himself  to 
a more  fertile  district,  or,  possessing  the  means  of 
purchase,  he  may  add  to  his  old  environment  by 
importation  the  “ external  relations  ” necessary  to 
continued  life.  But  if  from  any  cause  he  fails  to 
adjust  himself  to  the  altered  circumstances,  his  body 
is  thrown  out  of  correspondence  with  his  environ- 
ment, his  “internal  relations  ” are  no  longer  adjusted 
to  his  “ external  relations,”  and  his  life  must  cease. 

In  ordinary  circumstances,  and  in  health,  the  hu- 
man organism  is  in  thorough  correspondence  with  its 
surroundings ; but  when  any  part  of  the  organism  by 


DEATH, 


m 


disease  or  accident  is  thrown  out  of  correspondence, 
it  is  in  that  relation  dead. 

This  Death,  this  want  of  correspondence,  may  be 
either  paitial  or  complete.  Part  of  the  organism  may 
be  dead  to  a part  of  the  environment,  or  the  whole 
to  the  whole.  Thus  the  victim  of  famine  may  have 
a certain  number  of  his  correspondences  arrested  by 
the  change  in  his  environment,  but  not  all.  Luxuries 
which  he  once  enjoyed  no  longer  enter  the  country, 
animals  which  once  furnished  his  table  are  driven 
from  it  These,  still  exist,  but  they  are  beyond  the 
limit  of  his  correspondence.  In  relation  to  these 
things  therefore  he  is  dead.  In  one  sense  it  might 
be  said  that  it  was  the  environment  which  playea 
him  false ; in  another,  that  it  was  his  own  organiza- 
tion— that  he  was  unable  to  adjust  himself,  or  did 
not.  But,  however  caused,  he  pays  the  penalty  with 
partial  Death. 

Suppose  next  the  case  of  a man  who  is  thrown 
out  of  correspondence  with  a part  of  his  environ- 
ment by  some  physical  infirmity.  Let  it  be  that  by 
disease  or  accident  he  has  been  deprived  of  the  use 
of  his  ears.  The  deaf  man,  in  virtue  of  this  imper- 
fection, is  thrown  out  of  rapport  with  a large  and 
well-defined  part  of  the  environment,  namely,  its 
sounds.  With  regard  to  that  “external  relation,” 
therefore,  he  is  no  longer  living.  Part  of  him  may 


DEATH, 


•'SO 

truly  be  held  to  be  insensible  or  " Dead.”  A man 
who  is  also  blind  is  thrown  out  of  correspondence 
with  another  large  part  of  his  environment.  The 
beauty  of  sea  and  sky,  the  forms  of  cloud  and  moun- 
tain, the  features  i nd  gestures  of  friends,  are  to  him 
as  if  they  were  not.  They  are  there,  solid  and  real, 
but  not  to  him  ; he  is  still  further  “ Dead.’’  Next, 
let  it  be  conceived,  the  subtle  finger  of  cerebral  dis^ 
ease  lays  hold  of  him.  His  whole  brain  is  affected, 
and  the  sensory  nerves,  the  medium  of  communica- 
tion with  the  environment,  cease  altogether  to  ac- 
quaint him  with  w^hat  is  doing  in  the  outside  world. 
The  outside  world  is  still  there,  but  not  to  him  ; he  is 
still  further  “ Dead.”  And  so  the  death  of  parts  goes 
on.  He  becomes  less  and  less  alive.  Were  the 
animal  frame  not  the  complicated  machine  we  have 
seen  it  to  be,  death  might  come  as  a simple  and 
gradual  dissolution,  the  ‘ sans  everything  ’ being  the 
last  stage  of  the  successive  loss  of  fundamental 
powers.’'^  But  finally  some  important  part  of  the 
mere  animal  framework  that  remains  breaks  down. 
The  correlation  with  the  other  parts  is  very  intimate, 
and  the  stoppage  of  correspondence  with  one  means 
an  interference  with  the  work  of  the  rest.  Some- 
thing central  has  snapped,  and  all  are  thrown  out  of 


Foster’s  Physiology,”  p,  642. 


DEATH. 


ISI 


work.  The  lungs  refuse  to  correspond  with  the  air, 
the  heart  with  the  blood.  There  is  now  no  corre- 
spondence whatever  with  environment — the  thing,  for 
it  is  now  a thing,  is  Dead. 

This  then  is  Death;  “part  of  the  framework  breaks 
down,”  “ something  has  snapped  ” — these  phrases  by 
which  we  describe  the  phases  of  death  yield  their 
full  meaning.  They  are  different  ways  of  saying  that 
"correspondence”  has  ceased.  And  the  scientific 
meaning  of  Death  now  becomes  clearly  intelligible. 
Dying  is  that  breakdown  in  an  organism  which 
throws  it  out  of  correspondence  with  some  necessary 
part  of  the  environment.  Death  is  the  result  pro- 
duced, the  want  of  correspondence.  We  do  not  say 
that  this  is  all  that  is  involved.  But  this  is  the  root 
idea  of  Death — Failure  to  adjust  internal  relations 
to  external  relations,  failure  to  repair  the  broken 
inward  connection  sufficiently  to  enable  it  to  corre- 
spond again  with  the  old  surroundings.  These  pre- 
liminary statements  may  be  fitly  closed  with  the 
words  of  Mr.  Herbert  Spencer : " Death  by  natural 
decay  occurs  because  in  old  age  the  relations  be- 
tween assimilation,  oxidation,  and  genesis  of  force 
going  on  in  the  organism  gradually  fall  out  of  corre- 
spondence with  the  relations  between  oxygen  and 
food  and  absorption  of  heat  by  the  environment 
Death  from  disease  arises  either  when  the  organism 


153 


DEATH. 


is  congenitally  defective  in  its  power  to  balance  the 
ordinary  external  actions  by  the  ordinary  internal 
actions,  or  when  there  has  taken  place  some  un- 
usual external  action  to  which  there  was  no  answer- 
ing interna]  action.  Death  by  accident  implies  some 
neighbouring  mechanical  changes  of  which  the  causes 
are  either  unnoticed  from  inattention,  or  are  so  in- 
tricate that  their  results  cannot  be  foreseen,  and  con- 
sequently certain  relations  in  the  organism  are  not 
adjusted  to  the  relations  in  the  environment/'^ 

With  the  help  of  these  plain  biological  terms  we 
may  now  proceed  to  examine  the  parallel  phenome- 
non of  Death  in  the  spiritual  world.  The  factors 
with  which  we  have  to  deal  are  two  in  number  as 
before — Organism  and  Environment.  The  relation 
between^ them  may  once  more  be  denominated  by 
“ correspondence."  And  the  truth  to  be  emphasised 
resolves  itself  into  this,  that  Spiritua/  Death  is  a 
want  of  correspondence  between  the  organism  and 
the  spiritual  environment. 

What  is  the  spiritual  environment } This  term 
obviously  demands  some  further  definition.  For 
Death  is  a relative  term.  And  before  we  can  define 
Death  in  the  spiritual  world  we  must  first  apprehend 
the  particular  relation  with  reference  to  which  the 


‘ Op.  cit.,  pp.  88,  89. 


DEATH. 


^53 


expression  is  to  be  employed.  We  shall  best  reach 
the  nature  of  this  relation  by  considering  for  a 
moment  the  subject  of  environment  generally.  By 
the  natural  environment  we  mean  the  entire  surround- 
ings of  the  natural  man,  the  entire  external  world  in 
which  he  lives  and  moves  and  has  his  being.  It  is 
not  involved  in  the  idea  that  either  with  all  or  part 
of  this  environment  he  is  in  immediate  correspond- 
ence, Whether  he  correspond  with  it  or  not,  it  is 
there.  There  is  in  fact  a conscious  environment  and 
an  environment  of  which  he  is  not  conscious  ; and  it 
must  be  bprne  in  mind  that  the  conscious  environ- 
ment is  not  all  the  environment  that  is.  All  that 
surrounds  him,  all  that  environs  him,  conscious  or 
unconscious,  is  environment.  The  moon  and  stars 
are  part  of  it,  though  in  the  daytime  he  may  not  see 
them.  The  polar  regions  are  parts  of  it,  though  he 
is  seldom  aware  of  their  influence.  In  its  widest 
sense  environment  simply  means  all  else  that  is. 

Now  it  will  next  be  manifest  that  different  organ- 
isms correspond  with  this  environment  in  varying 
degrees  of  completeness  or  incompleteness.  At  the 
bottom  of  the  biological  scale  we  find  organisms 
which  have  only  the  most  limited  correspondence 
with  their  surroundings.  A tree,  for  example,  cor- 
responds with  the  soil  about  its  stem,  with  the  sun- 
light, and  with  the  air  in  contact  with  its  leaves 


154 


DEATH. 


But  it  is  shut  off  by  its  comparatively  low  develop- 
ment from  a whole  world  to  which  higher  forms  ol 
life  have  additional  access.  The  want  of  locomotion 
alone  circumscribes  most  seriously  its  area  of  corre- 
spondence, so  that  to  a large  part  of  surrounding 
nature  it  may  truly  be  said  to  be  dead.  So  far  as 
consciousness  is  concerned,  we  should  be  justified 
indeed  in  saying  that  it  was  not  alive  at  all.  The 
murmur  of  the  stream  which  bathes  its  roots^affects 
it  not.  The  marvellous  insect-life  beneath  its  shadow 
excites  in  it  no  wonder.  The  tender  maternity  of 
the  bird  which  has  its  nest  among  its  leaves  stirs 
no  responsive  sympathy.  It  cannot  correspond  with 
those  things.  To  stream  and  insect  and  bird  it 
is  insensible,  torpid,  dead.  For  this  is  Death,  this 
irresponsiveness. 

The  bird,  again,  which  is  higher  in  the  scale  of  life, 
corresponds  with  a wider  environment.  The  stream 
is  real  to  it,  and  the  insect.  It  knows  what  lies 
behind  the  hill ; it  listens  to  the  love-song  of  its 
mate.  And  to  much  besides  beyond  the  simple 
world  of  the  tree  this  higher  organism  is  alive.  The 
bird  we  should  say  is  more  living  than  the  tree  ; it 
has  a correspondence  with  a larger  area  of  environ- 
ment. But  this  bird-life  is  not  yet  the  highest  life. 
Even  within  the  immediate  bird-environment  there 
is  much  to  which  the  bird  must  still  be  held  tQ 


DEATH. 


m 


be  dead.  Introduce  a higher  organism,  place  man 
himself  within  this  same  environment,  and  see  how 
much  more  living  he  is.  A hundred  things  which 
the  bird  never  saw  in  insect,  stream,  and  tree  appeal 
to  him.  Each  single  sense  has  something  to  cor- 
respond with.  Each  faculty  finds  an  appropriate 
exercise.  Man  is  a mass  of  correspondences,  and 
because  of  these,  because  he  is  alive  to  countless 
objects  and  influences  to  which  lower  organisms  are 
dead,  he  is  the  most  living  of  all  creatures. 

The  relativity  of  Death  will  now  have  become 
sufficiently  obvious.  Man  being  left  out  of  account, 
all  organisms  are  seen  as  it  were  to  be  partly  living 
and  partly  dead.  The  tree,  in  correspondence  with 
a narrow  area  of  environment,  is  to  that  extent  alive ; 
to  all  beyond,  to  the  all  but  infinite  area  beyond,  it 
is  dead.  A still  wider  portion  of  this  vast  area  is 
the  possession  of  the  insect  and  the  bird.  Their’s 
also,  nevertheless,  is  but  a little  world,  and  to  an 
immense  further  area  insect  and  bird  are  dead.  All 
organisms  likewise  are  living  and  dead — living  to  all 
within  the  circumference  of  their  correspondences^ 
dead  to  all  beyond.  As  we  rise  in  the  scale  of  life, 
however,  it  will  be  observed  that  the  sway  of  Death 
is  gradually  weakened.  More  and  more  of  the  en- 
vironment becomes  accessible  as  we  ascend,  and  the 
domain  of  life  in  this  way  slowly  extends  in  ever- 


‘56 


DEATH. 


widening  circles.  But  until  man  appears  there  is  no 
organism  to  correspond  with  the  whole  environment 
Till  then  the  outermost  circles  have  no  correspond* 
ents.  To  the  inhabitants  of  the  innermost  spheres 
they  are  as  if  they  were  not. 

Now  follows  a momentous  question.  Is  man  in 
correspondence  with  the  whole  environment  ? When 
we  reach  the  highest  living  organism,  is  the  final 
blow  dealt  to  the  kingdom  of  Death } Has  the  last 
acre  of  the  infinite  area  been  taken  in  by  his  finite 
faculties } Is  his  conscious  environment  the  whole 
environment.?  Or  is  there,  among  these  outermost 
circles,  one  which  with  his  multitudinous  correspond- 
ences he  fails  to  reach .?  If  so,  this  is  Death.  The 
question  of  Life  or  Death  to  him  is  the  question 
of  the  amount  of  remaining  environment  he  is  able 
to  compass.  If  there  be  one  circle  or  one  segment 
of  a circle  which  he  yet  fails  to  reach,  to  correspond 
with,  to  know,  to  be  influenced  by,  he  is,  with  regard 
to  that  circle  or  segment,  dead. 

What  then,  practically,  is  the  state  of  the  case  ? 
Is  man  in  correspondence  with  the  whole  environ- 
ment or  is  he  not .?  There  is  but  one  answer.  He 
is  not.  Of  men  generally  it  cannot  be  said  that  they 
are  in  living  contact  with  that  part  of  the  environ- 
ment which  is  called  the  spiritual  world  In  intro- 
ducing this  new  term  spiritual  world,  observe,  we  are 


DEATH. 


*5? 


not  interpolating  a new  factor.  This  is  an  essential 
part  of  the  old  idea.  We  have  been  following  out  an 
ever-widening  environment  from  point  to  point,  and 
now  we  reach  the  outermost  zones.  The  spiritual 
world  is  simply  the  outermost  segment,  circle,  or 
circles,  of  the  natural  world.  For  purposes  of  con- 
venience we  separate  the  two  just  as  we  separate  the 
animal  world  from  the  plant.  But  the  animal  world 
and  the  plant  world  are  the  same  world.  They  are 
different  parts  of  one  environment.  And  the  natural 
and  spiritual  are  likewise  one.  The  inner  circles  are 
called  the  natural,  the  outer  the  spiritual.  And  we 
call  them  spiritual  simply  becayse  they  are  beyond 
us  or  beyond  a part  of  us.  What  we  have  corre- 
spondence with,  that  we  call  natural ; what  we  have 
little  or  no  correspondence  with,  that  we  call  spiritual. 
But  when  the  appropriate  corresponding  organism 
appears,  the  organism,  that  is,  which  can  freely  com- 
municate with  these  outer  circles,  the  distinction 
necessarily  disappears.  The  spiritual  to  it  becomes 
the  outer  circle  of  the  natural. 

Now  of  the  great  mass  of  living  organisms,  of  the 
great  mass  of  men,  is  it  not  to  be  affirmed  that  they 
are  out  of  correspondence  with  this  outer  circle } 
Suppose,  to  make  the  final  issue  more  real,  we  give 
this  outermost  circle  of  environment  a name.  Sup- 
pose we  call  it  God.  Suppose  also  we  substitute 


DEATH. 


fS8 

a word  for  ‘‘correspondence/'  to  express  more  in- 
timately the  personal  relation.  Let  us  call  it  Com- 
munion. We  can  nov/  determine  accurately  the 
spiritual  relation  of  different  sections  of  mankind. 
Those  who  are  in  communion  with  God  live,  those 
who  are  not  are  dead. 

The  extent  or  depth  of  this  communion,  the 
varying  degrees  of  correspondence  in  different  indi- 
viduals, and  the  less  or  more  abundant  life  which 
these  result  in,  need  not  concern  us  for  the  present. 
The  task  we  have  set  ourselves  is  to  investigate  the 
essential  nature  of  Spiritual  Death.  And  we  have 
found  it  to  consist  in  a w^ant  of  communion  with  God. 
The  unspiritual  man  is  he  who  lives  in  the  circum- 
scribed environment  of  this  present  world.  “ She 
that  liveth  in  pleasure  is  Dead  while  she  liveth." 
“ To  be  carnally  minded  is  Death."  To  be  carnally 
minded,  translated  into  the  language  of  science,  is 
to  be  limited  in  one’s  correspondences  to  the  environ- 
ment of  the  natural  man.  It  is  no  necessary  part 
of  the  conception  that  the  mind  should  be  either 
purposely  irreligious,  or  directly  vicious.  The  mind 
of  the  flesh,  (ppovrjfjba  aapico^j  by  its  very  nature, 
limited  capacity,  and  time-ward  tendency,  is  Bavaro^;, 
Death.  This  earthly  mind  may  be  of  noble  calibre, 
enriched  by  culture,  high  toned,  virtuous  and  pure. 
But  if  it  know  not  God  ? What  though  its  cor- 


DEA  TH, 


X59 

respondences  reach  to  the  stars  of  heaven  or  grasp 
tht;  n?.agnitudes  of  Time  and  Space  ? The  stars  of 
heaven  are  not  heaven.  Space  is  not  God.  This 
mind,  certainly,  has  life,  life  up  to  its  level.  There 
is  no  trace  of  Death.  Possibly  too,  it  carries  its 
deprivation  lightly,  ;^nd,  up  to  its  level,  lives  content. 
We  do  not  picture  the  possessor  of  this  carnal  mind 
as  in  any  sense  a monster.  We  have  said  he  may  be 
high-toned,  virtuous,  and  pure.  The  plant  is  not  a 
monster  because  it  is  dead  to  the  voice  of  the  bird  ; 
nor  is  he  a monster  who  is  dead  to  the  voice  of  God. 
The  contention  at  present  simply  is  that  he  is  Dead. 

We  do  not  need  to  go  to  Revelation  for  the  proof 
of  this.  That  has  been  rendered  unnecessary  by  the 
testimony  of  the  Dead  themselves.  Thousands  have 
uttered  themselves  upon  their  relation  to  the  Spiritual 
World,  and  from  their  own  lips  we  have  the  proclam- 
ation of  their  Death  The  language  of  theology  in 
describing  the  state  of  the  natural  man  is  often 
regarded  as  severe.  The  Pauline  anthropology  has 
been  challenged  as  an  insult  to  human  nature. 
Culture  has  opposed  the  doctrine  that  ‘‘  The  natural 
man  receiveth  not  the  things  of  the  Spirit  of  God, 
for  they  are  foolishness  unto  him  : neither  can  he 
know  them,  because  they  are  spiritually  discerned/’ 
And  even  some  modern  theologies  have  refused  to 
accept  the  most  plain  of  the  aphorisms  of  Jesus,  that 


i6o 


DEATH. 


“ Except  a man  be  born  again  he  cannot  see  the 
Kingdom  of  God/*  But  this  stern  doctrine  of  the 
spiritual  deadness  of  humanity  is  no  mere  dogma  of 
a past  theology.  The  history  of  thought  during  the 
present  century  proves  that  the  world  has  come 
round  spontaneously  to  the  position  of  the  first. 
One  of  the  ablest  philosophical  schools  of  the  day 
erects . a whole  antichristian  system  on  this  very 
doctrine.  Seeking  by  means  of  it  to  sap  the  founda- 
tion of  spiritual  religion,  it  stands  unconsciously  as 
the  most  significant  witness  for  its  truth.  What  is 
the  creed  of  the  Agnostic,  but  the  confession  of  the 
spiritual  numbness  of  humanity } The  negative 
doctrine  which  it  reiterates  with  such  sad  persistency, 
what  is  it  but  the  echo  of  the  oldest  of  scientific  and 
religious  truths  } And  what  are  all  these  gloomy 
and  rebellious  infidelities,  these  touching,  and  too 
sincere  confessions  of  universal  nescience,  but  a pro- 
test against  this  ancient  law  of  Death  } 

The  Christian  apologist  never  further  misses  the 
mark  than  when  he  refuses  the  testimony  of  the 
Agnostic  to  himself.  When  the  Agnostic  tells  me 
he  is  blind  and  deaf,  dumb,  torpid  and  dead  to  the 
spiiitual  world,  I must  believe  him.  Jesus  tells  me 
that.  Paul  tells  me  that.  Science  tells  me  that. 
He  knows  nothing  of  this  outermost  circle  ; and  we 
are  compelled  to  trust  his  sincerity  as  readily  when 


DEATH. 


i6l 


he  deplores  it  as  if,  being  a man  without  an  ear,  he 
professed  to  know  nothing  of  a musical  world,  of 
being  without  taste,  of  a world  of  art.  The  nescience 
of  the  Agnostic  philosophy  is  the  proof  from  ex- 
perience that  to  be  carnally  minded  is  Death.  Let 
the  theological  value  of  the  concession  be  duly  recog- 
nised. It  brings  no  solace  to  the  unspiritual  man 
to  be  told  he  is  mistaken.  To  say  he  is  self-deceived 
is  neither  to  compliment  him  nor  Christianity,  He 
builds  in  all  sincerity  who  raises  his  altar  to  the 
Unknown  God.  He  does  not  know  God.  With  all 
his  marvellous  and  complex  correspondences,  he  is 
still  one  correspondence  short. 

It  is  a point  worthy  of  special  note  that  the  pro- 
clamation of  this  truth  has  always  come  from  science 
rather  than  from  religion.  Its  general  ’ acceptance 
by  thinkers  is  based  upon  the  universal  failure  of  a 
universal  experiment.  The  statement,  therefore,  that 
the  natural  man  discerneth  not  the  things  of  the 
spirit,  is  never  to  be  charged  against  the  intolerance 
of  theology.  There  is  no  point  at  which  theology 
has  been  more  modest  than  here.  It  has  left  the 
preaching  of  a great  fundamental  truth  almost  en- 
tirely to  philosophy  and  science.  And  so  very 
moderate  has  been  its  tone,  so  slight  has  been  the 
emphasis  placed  upon  the  paralysis  of  the  natural 
with  regard  to  the  spiritual,  that  it  may  seem  to 


M 


i62 


DEATH. 


some  to  have  been  intolerantly  tolerant.  No  harm 
certainly  could  come  now,  no  offence  could  be  given 
to  science,  if  religion  asserted  more  clearly  its  right 
to  the  spiritual  world.  Science  has  paved  the  way 
for  the  reception  of  one  of  the  most  revolutionary 
doctrines  of  Christianity ; and  if  Christianity  refuses 
to  take  advantage  of  the  opening  it  will  manifest  a 
culpable  want  of  confidence  in  itself.  There  never 
was  a time  when  its  fundamental  doctrines  could 
more  boldly  be  proclaimed,  or  when  they  could 
better  secure  the  respect  and  arrest  the  interest  of 
Science. 

To  all  this,  and  apparently  with  force,  it  may, 
however,  be  objected  that  to  every  man  who  truly 
studies  Nature  there  is  a God.  Call  Him  by  what- 
ever name— a Creator,  a Supreme  Being,  a Great 
First  Cause,  a Power  that  makes  for  Righteousness — 
Science  has  a God  ; and  he  who  believes  in  this,  in 
spite  of  all  protest,  possesses  a theology.  “ If  we 
will  look  at  things,  and  not  merely  at  words,  we 
shall  soon  see  that  the  scientific  man  has  a theology 
and  a God,  a most  impressive  theology,  a most  awful 
and  glorious  God.  I say  that  man  believes  in  a 
God,  who  feels  himself  in  the  presence  of  a Power 
which  is  not  himself,  and  is  immeasurably  above 
himself,  a Power  in  the  contemplation  of  which  he 
IS  absorbed,  in  the  knowledge  of  which  he  finds 


DEATH. 


safety  and  happiness.  And  such  now  is  Nature  to 
the  scientific  man.”^  Such  now,  we  humbly  submit, 
is  Nature  to  very  few.  Their  own  confession  is 
against  it.  That  they  are  “absorbed"’  in  the  contem- 
plation we  can  well  believe.  That  they  might  “ find 
safety  and  happiness  ” in  the  knowledge  of  Him  is 
also  possible — if  they  had  it.  But  this  is  just  what 
they  tell  us  they  have  not.  What  they  deny  is  not 
a God.  It  is  the  correspondence.  The  very  con- 
fession of  the  Unknowable  is  itself  the  dull  recog- 
nition of  an  Environment  beyond  themselves,  and 
for  which  they  feel  they  lack  the  correspondence. 
It  is  this  want  that  makes  their  God  the  Unknown 
God.  And  it  is  this  that  makes  them  dead. 

We  have  not  said,  or  implied,  that  there  is  not  a 
God  of  Nature.  We  have  not  affirmed  that  there 
is  no  Natural  Religion.  We  are  assured  there  is. 
We  are  even  assured  that  without  a Religion  of 
Nature  Religion  is  only  half  complete ; that  without 
a God  of  Nature  the  God  of  Revelation  is  only  half 
intelligible  and  only  partially  known.  God  is  not 
confined  to  the  outermost  circle  of  environment.  He 
lives  and  moves  and  has  His  being  in  the  whole. 
Those  who  only  seek  Him  in  the  further  zone  can 
only  find  a part  The  Christian  who  knows  not 


' ^ Natural  Religion,”  p.  19. 


164 


DEATH. 


God  in  Nature,  who  does  not,  that  is  to  say,  corre- 
spond with  the  whole  environment,  most  certainly  is 
partially  dead.  The  author  of  Ecce  Homo  may  be 
partially  right  when  he  says  : “ I think  a bystander 
would  say  that  though  Christianity  had  in  it  some- 
thing far  higher  and  deeper  and  more  ennobling, 
yet  the  average  scientific  man  worships  just  at 
present  a more  awful,  and,  as  it  were,  a greater 
Deity  than  the  average  Christian.  In  so  many 
Christians  the  idea  of  God  has  been  degraded  by 
childish  and  little-minded  teaching ; the  Eternal  and 
the  Infinite  and  the  All-embracing  has  been  repre- 
sented as  the  head  of  the  clerical  interest,  as  a sort 
of  clergyman,  as  a sort  of  schoolmaster,  as  a sort  of 
philanthropist.  But  the  scientific  man  knows  Him 
to  be  eternal ; in  astronomy,  in  geology,  he  becomes 
familiar  with  the  countless  millenniums  of  His  life- 
time. The  scientific  man  strains  his  mind  actually 
to  realize  God’s  infinity.  As  far  ofif  as  the  fixed 
stars  he  traces  Him,  ‘ distance  inexpressible  by 
numbers  that  have  name.'  Meanwhile,  to  the  theo- 
logian, infinity  and  eternity  are  very  much  of  empty 
words  when  applied  to  the  Object  of  his  worship. 
He  does  not  realize  them  in  actual  facts  and  definite 
computations.”^  Let  us  accept  this  rebuke.  The 


• “ Natural  Religion,”  p.  20 


DEATH. 


165 

principle  that  want  of  correspondence  is  Death 
applies  all  round.  He  who  knows  not  God  in  Nature 
only  partially  lives.  The  converse  of  this,  however, 
IS  not  true  ; and  that  is  the  point  we  are  insisting 
on.  He  who  knows  God  only  in  Nature  lives  not 
There  is  no  ^‘correspondence'’  with  an  Unknown 
God,  no  “continuous  adjustment”  to  a fixed  First 
Cause.  There  is  no  “assimilation”  of  Natural  Law; 
no  growth  in  the  Image  of  “ the  All-embracing.”  To 
correspond  with  the  God  of  Science  assuredly  is  not 
to  live.  “ This  is  Life  Eternal,  to  know  Thee,  the 
true  God,  and  Jesus  Christ  Whom  Thou  hast  sent” 
From  the  service  we  have  tried  to  make  natural 
science  render  to  our  religion,  we  might  be  expected 
possibly  to  take  up  the  position  that  the  absolute 
contribution  of  Science  to  Revelation  was  very  great. 
On  the  contrary,  it  is  very  small.  The  absolute  con- 
tribution, that  is,  is  very  small.  The  contribution  on 
the  whole  is  immense,  vaster  than  we  have  yet  any 
idea  of.  But  without  the  aid  of  the  higher  Revela- 
tion this  many-toned  and  far-reaching  voice  had  been 
for  ever  dumb.  The  light  of  Nature,  say  the  most 
for  it,  is  dim — how  dim  we  ourselves,  with  the  glare 
of  other  Light  upon  the  modern  world,  can  only  re- 
alize when  we  seek  among  the  pagan  records  of  the 
past  for  the  gropings  after  truth  of  those  whose  only 
light  was  this.  Powerfully  significant  and  touching 


i66 


DEATH. 


as  these  efforts  were  in  their  success,  they  are  fat 
more  significant  and  touching  in  their  failure.  For 
they  did  fail.  It  requires  no  philosophy  now  to 
speculate  on  the  adequacy  or  inadequacy  of  the  Re- 
ligion of  Nature.  For  us  who  could  never  weigh  it 
rightly  in  the  scales  of  Truth  it  has  been  tried  in  the 
balance  of  experience  and  found  wanting.  Theism 
is  the  easiest  of  all  religions  to  get,  but  the  most 
difficult  to  keep.  Individuals  have  kept  it,  but  na- 
tions never.  Socrates  and  Aristotle,  Cicero  and 
Epictetus  had  a theistic  religion ; Greece  and  Rome 
had  none.  And  even  after  getting  what  seems  like 
a firm  place  in  the  minds  of  men,  its  unstable  equili- 
brium sooner  or  later  betrays  itself.  'On  the  one 
hand  theism  has  always  fallen  into  the  wildest  poly- 
theism, or  on  the  other  into  the  blankest  atheism. 
“ It  is  an  indubitable  historical  fact  that,  outside  of 
the  sphere  of  special  revelation,  man  has  never  ob- 
tained such  a knowledge  of  God  as  a responsible  and 
religious  being  plainly  requires.  The  wisdom  of  the 
heathen  world,  at  its  very  best,  was  utterly  inade- 
quate to  the  accomplishment  of  such  a task  as  creat- 
ing a due  abhorrence  of  sin,  controlling  the  passions, 
purifying  the  heart,  and  ennobling  the  conduct.”  ^ 
What  is  the  inference  ? That  this  poor  rush-light 


^ Prof.  Flint,  “Theism,”  p.  305. 


DEATH, 


167 


by  itself  was  never  meant  to  lend  the  ray  by  which 
man  should  read  the  riddle  of  the  universe.  The 
mystery  is  too  impenetrable  and  remote  for  its  un- 
certain flicker  to  more  than  make  the  darkness 
deeper.  What  indeed  if  this  were  not  a light  at  all, 
but  only  part  of  a light — the  carbon  point,  the  frag- 
ment of  calcium,  the  reflector  in  the  great  Lantern 
which  contains  the  Light  of  the  World  ? 

This  is  one  inference.  But  the  most  important  is 
that  the  absence  of  the  true  Light  means  moral 
Death.  The  darkness  of  the  natural  world  to  the 
intellect  is  not  all.  What  history  testifies  to  is,  first 
the  partial,  and  then  the  total  eclipse  of  virtue  that 
always  follows  the  abandonment  of  belief  in  a per- 
sonal God.  It  is  not,  as  has  been  pointed  out  a 
• 

hundred  times,  that  morality  in  the  abstract  dis- 
appears, but  the  motive  and  sanction  are  gone. 
There  is  nothing  to  raise  it  from  the  dead.  ’ Man's 
attitude  to  it  is  left  to  himself.  Grant  that  morals 
have  their  own  base  in  human  life ; grant  that 
Nature  has  a Religion  whose  creed  is  Science ; there 
is  yet  nothing  apart  from  God  to  save  the  world  from 
moral  Death.  Morality  has  the  power  to  dictate  but 
none  tc  move.  Nature  directs  but  cannot  control. 
As  was  wisely  expressed  in  one  of  many  pregnant 
utterances  during  a recent  Symposium,  ‘‘  Though  the 
decay  of  rel’gion  may  leave  the  institutes  of  niorality 


168 


DEATH. 


intact,  it  drains  off  their  inward  power.  The  devout 
faitli  of  men  expresses  and  measures  the  intensity  of 
their  moral  nature,  and  it  cannot  be  lost  without  a 
lemission  of  enthusiasm,  and  under  this  low  pressure, 
the  successful  reentrance  of  importunate  desires  and 
clamorous  { assions  which  had  been  driven  back.  To 
believe  in  an  ever-living  and  perfect  Mind,  supreme 
over  the  universe,  is  to  invest  moral  distinctions  with 
immensity  and  eternity,  and  lift  them  from  the 
provincial  stage  of  human  society  to  the  imperishable 
theatre  of  all  being.  When  planted  thus  in  the  very 
substance  of  things,  they  justify  and  support  the  ideal 
estimates  of  the  conscience ; they  deepen  every  guilty 
shame ; they  guarantee  every  righteous  hope  ; and 
they  help  the  will  with  a Divine  casting-vote  in  every 
balance  of  temptation.”  ^ That  morality  has  a basis 
in  human  society,  that  Nature  has  a Religion,  surely 
makes  the  Death  of  the  soul  when  left  to  itself  all 
the  more  appalling.  It  means  that,  between  them, 
Nature  and  morality  provide  all  for  virtue — except 
the  Life  to  live  it 

It  is  at  this  point  accordingly  that  our  subject 
comes  into  intimate  contact  with  Religion.  The  pro- 
position that  ‘‘to  be  carnally  minded  is  Death  ” even 

^ Martineau  Vide  the  whole  Symposium  on  “ The  Influ- 
ences upon  Morality  of  a Decline  in  Religious  Belief.” — Nine- 
teenth Century^  vol  i.  pp.  331,  531. 


DEA  TIE 


169 


the  moralist  will  assent  to.  But  when  it  is  further 
announced  that  “the  carnal  mind  is  enmity  aj^ainsi 
Gcd'^  we  find  ourselves  in  a ditlerent  region.  And 
when  we  find  it  also  stated  that  “ the  waeres  of  sin  is 
Death,”  we  are  in  the  heart  of  the  profoundest  ques- 
tions of  theology.  What  before  was  merely  “enmity 
against  society”  becomes  “enmity  against  God;”  and 
what  was  “ vice  ” is  “ sin.”  The  conception  of  a God 
gives  an  altogether  new  colour  to  worldliness  and 
vice.  Worldliness  it  changes  into  heathenism,  vice 
into  blasphemy.  The  carnal  mind,  the  mind  which 
is  turned  away  from  God,  which  will  not  correspond 
with  God — this  is  not  moral  only  but  spiritual  Death. 
And  Sin,  that  which  separates  from  God,  which  dis- 
obeys God,  which  can  not  in  that  state  correspond 
with  God — this  is  hell 

To  the  estrangement  of  the  soul  from  God  the  best 
of  theology  traces  the  ultimate  cause  of  sin.  Sin  is 
simply  apostasy  from  God,  unbelief  in  God.  “ Sin 
is  manifest  in  its  true  character  when  the  demand  of 
holiness  in  the  conscience,  presenting  itself  to  the 
man  as  one  of  loving  submission  to  God,  is  put  from 
him  with  aversion.  Here  sin  appears  as  it  really  is, 
a turning  away  from  God  ; and  while  the  man’s  guilt 
is  enhanced,  there  ensues  a benumbing  of  the  heait 
resulting  from  the  crushing  of  those  higher^  impulses 
This  is  what  is  meant  by  the  reprobate  state  of  tho«^ 


170 


DEATH. 


who  reject  Christ  and  will  not  believe  the  Gospel,  so 
often  spoken  of  in  the  New  Testament ; this  unbelief 
IS  just  the  closing  of  the  heart  against  the  highest 
love/*^  The  other  view  of  sin,  probably  the  more 
popular  at  present,  that  sin  consists  in  selfishness,  is 
merely  this  from  another  aspect.  Obviously  if  the 
mind  turns  away  from  one  part  of  the  environment 
it  will  only  do  so  under  some  temptation  to  corre- 
spond with  another.  This  temptation,  at  bottom,  can 
only  come  from  one  source — the  love  of  self.  The 
irreligious  man’s  correspondences  are  concentrated 
upon  himself.  He  worships  himself.  Self-gratifica- 
tion rather  than  self-denial ; independence  rather 
than  submission — these  are  the  rules  of  life.  And 
this  is  at  once  the  poorest  and  the  commonest  form 
of  idolatry. 

But  whichever  of  these  views  of  sin  we  emphasize, 
we  find  both  equally  connected  with  Death.  If 
sin  is  estrangement  from  God,  this  very  estrange- 
ment is  Death.  It  is  a want  of  correspondence.  If 
sin  is  selfishness,  it  is  conducted  at  the  expense  of 
life.  Its  wages  are  Death — he  that  loveth  his  life/ 
said  Christ,  ‘‘shall  lose  it” 

Yet  the  paralysis  of  the  moral  nature  apart  from 
God  does  not  only  depend  for  its  evidence  upon 


^ Muller:  • Christian  Doctrine  of  Sin.”  2nd  Ed.  vol.  I p.  13 1. 


DEATH. 


17* 


theology  or  even  upon  history.  From  the  analogies 
of  Nature  one  would  expect  this  result  as  a necessary 
consequence.  The  development  of  any  organism  in 
any  direction  is  dependent  on  its  environment.  A 
living  cell  cut  off  from  air  will  die.  A seed-germ 
apart  from  moisture  and  an  appropriate  temperature 
will  make  the  ground  its  grave  for  centuries.  Human 
nature,  likewise,  is  subject  to  similar  conditions.  It 
can  only  develop  in  presence  of  its  environment.  No 
matter  what  its  possibilities  may  be,  no  matter  what 
seeds  of  thought  or  virtue,  what  germs  of  genius  or 
of  art,  lie  latent  in  its  breast,  until  the  appropriate 
environment  present  itself  the  correspondence  is 
denied,  the  development  discouraged,  the  most 
splendid  possibilities  of  life  remain  unrealized,  and 
thought  and  virtue,  genius  and  art,  are  dead.  The 
true  environment  of  the  moral  life  is  God.  Here 
conscience  wakes.  Here  kindles  love.  Duty  here 
becomes  heroic;  and  that  righteousness  begins  tc 
live  which  alone  is  to  live  for  ever.  But  if  this  Atmo- 
sphere is  not,  the  dwarfed  soul  must  perish  for  mere 
want  of  its  native  air.  And  its  Death  is  a strictly 
natural  Death.  It  is  not  an  exceptional  judgment 
upon  Atheism.  In  the  same  circumstances,  in  the 
same  averted  relation  to  their  environment,  the  poet, 
the  musician,  the  artist,  would  alike  perish  to  poetry, 
to  music,  and  to  art  Every  environment  is  a cause, 


172 


DEATH, 


Its  effect  upon  me  is  exactly  proportionate  to  my 
correspondence  with  it.  If  I correspond  with  part  of 
it,  part  of  myself  is  influenced.  If  I correspond  with 
more,  more  of  myself  is  influenced  ; if  with  all,  all  is 
influenced.  If  I correspond  with  the  world,  I become 
worldly ; if  with  God,  I become  Divine.  As  without 
correspondence  of  the  scientific  man  with  the  natural 
environment  there  could  be  no  Science  and  no  action 
founded  on  the  knowledge  of  Nature,  so  without 
communion  with  the  spiritual  Environment  there  can 
be  no  Religion.  To  refuse  to  cultivate  the  religious 
relation  is  to  deny  to  the  soul  its  highest  right — the 
right  to  a further  evolution.^ 

We  have  already  admitted  that  he  who  knows 
not  God  may  not  be  a monster  ; we  cannot  say  he 
will  not  be  a dwarf.  This  precisely,  and  on  perfectly 

* It  would  not  be  difficult  to  show,  were  this  the  immediate 
subject,  that  it  is  not  only  a right  but  a duty  to  exercise  the 
spiritual  faculties,  a duty  demanded  not  by  religion  merely,  but 
by  science.  Upon  biological  principles  man  owes  his  full  de- 
velopment to  himself,  to  nature,  and  to  his  fellow-men.  Thus 
Mr.  Herbert  Spencer  affirms,  ‘‘  The  performance  of  every  func- 
tion is,  in  a sense,  a moral  obligation.  It  is  usually  thought 
that  morality  requires  us  only  to  restrain  such  vital  activities 
as,  in  our  present  state,  are  often  pushed  to  excess,  or  such  as 
conflict  with  average  welfare,  special  or  general ; but  it  also 
requires  us  to  carry  on  these  vital  activities  up  to  their  normal 
limits.  All  the  animal  functions,  in  common  with  all  the  higher 
functions,  have,  as  thus  understood,  their  imperativeness,”— 
“ The  Data  of  Ethics,”  2nd  Ed.,  p.  76. 


DEATH. 


173 


natural  principles,  is  what  he  must  be.  You  can 
dwarf  a soul  just  as  you  can  dwarf  a plant,  by  de- 
priving it  of  a full  environment.  Such  a soul  for  a 
time  may  have  ‘‘a  name  to  live.”  Its  character  may 
betray  no  sign  of  atrophy.  But  its  very  virtue 
somehow  has  the  pallor  of  a flower  that  is  grown  in 
darkness,  or  as  the  herb  which  has  never  seen  the  sun, 
no  fragrance  breathes  from  its  spirit  To  morality, 
possibly,  this  organism  offers  the  example  of  an 
irreproachable  life  ; but  to  science  it  is  an  instance  of 
arrested  development ; and  to  religion  it  presents  the 
spectacle  of  a corpse — a living  Death.  With  Ruskin, 
‘‘  I do  not  wonder  at  what  men  suffer,  but  I wonder 
often  at  what  they  lose.' 


MORTIFICATION, 


f>y  tying  its  main  artery^  we  stop  most  oj  tAi  blood 
going  to  a limby  theny  for  as  long  as  the  limb  performs  its 
function,  those  parts  which  are  called  into  play  must  be  wasted 
faster  than  they  are  repaired:  whence  eventual  disablement. 
The  relation  between  due  receipt  of  nutritive  matters  through 
its  arteries,  and  due  discha7ge  of  its  duties  by  the  limb,  is  a 
part  of  the  physical  order.  If  instead  of  cuttmg  off  the  supply 
to  a particular  limb,  we  bleed  the  patient  largely,  so  drafting 
away  the  inaterials  needed  for  repah'ing  not  07ie  limb  but  all 
limbs,  and  not  limbs  Ofily  but  viscera,  there  results  both  a 
muscular  debility  and  an  enfeeblement  of  the  vital  fy,nctions. 
Here,  again,  cause  and  effect  are  necessarily  related.  . 

Pass  now  to  those  actions  more  com7nonly  thought  of  as  the 
occasions  for  rules  of  conduct P 


Herbert  Spencer. 


MORTIFICATION. 

“ Mortify  therefore  your  members  which  are  upon  eartn.”— 

PauL 

O Star-eyed  Science  ! hast  thou  wandered  there 
To  waft  us  home  the  message  of  despair?” — Campbell. 

The  definition  of  Death  which  science  has  given  us 
is  this  : A falling  out  of  correspondence  with  envir- 
cnment.  When,  for  example,  a man  loses  the  sight 
of  his  eyes,  his  correspondence  with  the  environing 
world  is  curtailed.  His  life  is  limited  in  an  impor- 
tant direction ; he  is  less  living  than  he  was  before. 
If,  in  addition,  he  lose  the  senses  of  touch  and  hear- 
ing, his  correspondences  are  still  further  limited ; he 
is  therefore  still  further  dead.  And  when  all  possible 
correspondences  have  ceased,  when  the  nerves  decline 
to  respond  to  any  stimulus,  when  the  lungs  close 
their  gates  against  the  air,  when  the  heart  refuses  to 
correspond  with  the  blood  by  so  much  as  another 
beat,  the  insensate  corpse  is  wholly  and  for  ever 
dead.  The  soul,  in  like  manner,  which  has  no  corre- 
spondence with  the  spiritual  environment  is  spiritually 


N 


178 


MORTIFICA  TION, 


dead.  It  may  be  that  it  never  possessed  the  spiritual 
eye  or  the  spiritual  ear,  or  a heart  which  throbbed 
in  response  to  the  love  of  God.  If  so,  having  nevej 
lived,  it  cannot  be  said  to  have  died.  But  not  to 
have  these  correspondences  is  to  be  in  the  state  of 
Death.  To  the  spiritual  world,  to  the  Divine  Envir- 
onment, it  is  dead — as  a stone  which  has  never 
lived  is  dead  to  the  environment  of  the  organic 
world. 

t 

Having  already  abundantly  illustrated  this  use  of 
the  symbol  Death,  we  may  proceed  to  deal  with 
another  class  of  expressions  where  the  same  term  is 
employed  in  an  exactly  opposite  connection.  It  is  a 
proof  of  the  radical  nature  of  religion  that  a word 
so  extreme  should  have  to  be  used  again  and  again 
in  Christian  teaching,  to  define  in  different  directions 
the  true  spiritual  relations  of  mankind.  Hitherto  we 
have  concerned  ourselves  with  the  condition  of  the 
natural  man  with  regard  to  the  spiritual  world.  We 
have  now  to  speak  of  the  relations  of  the  spiritual 
man  with  regard  to  the  natural  world.  Carrying 
with  us  the  same  essential  principle — want  of  corre- 
spondence— ‘Underlying  the  meaning  of  Death,  we 
shall  find  that  the  relation  of  the  spiritual  man  to  the 
natural  world,  or  at  least  to  part  of  it,  is  to  be  that  of 
Death. 

When  the  natural  man  becomes  the  spiritual  man, 


MO  R TIFICA  TION. 


179 


the  great  change  is  described  by  Christ  as  a passing 
from  Death  unto  Life.  Before  the  transition  occurred, 
the  practical  difficulty  was  this,  how  to  get  into  cor- 
respondency with  the  new  Environment  ? But  no 
sooner  is  this  correspondence  established  than  the 
problem  is  reversed.  The  question  now  is,  how  to 
get  out  of  correspondence  with  the  old  environment  ? 
The  moment  the  new  life  is  begun  there  comes  a 
genuine  anxiety  to  break  with  the  old.  For  the 
former  environment  has  now  become  embarrassing. 
It  refuses  its  dismissal  from  consciousness.  It  com- 
petes doggedly  with  the  new  Environment  for  a share 
of  the  correspondences.  And  in  a hundred  ways  the 
former  traditions,  the  memories  and  passions  of  the 
past,  the  fixed  associations  and  habits  of  the  earlier 
life,  now  complicate  the  new  relation.  The  complex 
and  bewildered  soul,  in  fact,  finds  itself  in  correspon- 
dence with  two  environments,  each  with  urgent  but 
yet  incompatible  claims.  It  is  a dual  soul  living 
in  a double  world,  a world  whose  inhabitants  are 
deadly  enemies,  and  engaged  in  perpetual  civil- 
war. 

. The  position  of  things  is  perplexing.  It  is  deaf 
^that  no  man  can  attempt  to  live  both  lives.  To  walk 
both  in  the  flesh  and  in  the  spirit  is  morally  im- 
possible. No  man,*'  as  Christ  so  often  emphasized, 
“ can  serve  two  masters."  And  yet,  as  matter  ol 


i8o 


MOR  TIFICA  TION. 


fact,  here  is  the  new-born  being  in  communication 
with  both  environments  ? With  sin  and  purity,  light 
and  darkness,  time  and  Eternity,  God  and  Devil,  the 
confused  and  undecided  soul  is  now  in^correspon*» 
dence.  What  • is  to  be  done  in  such  an  emergency  ? 
How  can  the  New  Life  deliver  itself  from  the  still- 
persistent  past  ? 

A ready  solution  of  the  difficulty  would  be  to  die. 
Were  one  to  die  organically,  to  die  and  ‘‘go  to 
heaven,’'  all  correspondence  with  the  lower  environ- 
ment would  be  arrested  at  a stroke.  For  Physical 
Death  of  course  simply  means  the  final  stoppage  of 
all  natural  correspondences  with  this  sinful  world. 
But  this  alternative,  fortunately  or  unfortunately,  is 
not  open.  The  detention  here  of  body  and  spirit 
for  a given  period  is  determined  for  us,  and  we  are 
morally  bound  to  accept  the  situation.  We  must 
look  then  for  a further  alternative. 

Actual  Death  being  denied  us,  we  must  ask  our- 
selves if  there  is  nothing  else  resembling  it — no 
artificial  relation,  no  imitation  or  semblance  of  Death 
which  would  serve  our  purpose.  If  we  cannot  yet  die 
absolutely,  surely  the  next  best  thing  will  be  to  find 
a temporary  substitute.  If  we  cannot  die  altogether, 
in  short,  the  most  we  can  do  is  to  die  as  much  as  we 
can.  And  we  now  know  this  is  open  to  us,  and 
To  die  to  any  environment  is  to  withdraw  cor- 


MOR  TIFICA  TION, 


ihi 


respondence  with  it,  to  cut  ourselves  off,  so  far  as 
possible,  from  all  communication  with  it  So  that 
the  solution  of  the  problem  will  simply  be  this,  for 
the  spiritual  life  to  reverse  continuously  the  processes 
of  the  natural  life.  The  spiritual  man  having  passed 
from  Death  unto  Life,  the  natural  man  must  next 
proceed  to  pass  from  Life  unto  Death.  Having 
opened  the  new  set  of  correspondences,  he  must  de- 
liberately close  up  the  old.  Regeneration  in  short 
must  be  accompanied  by  Degeneration. 

Now  it  is  no  surprise  to  find  that  this  is  the  pro- 
cess everywhere  described  and  recommended  by  the 
founders  of  the  Christian  system.  Their  proposal  to 
the  natural  man,  or  rather  to  the  natural  part  of  the 
spiritual  man,  with  regard  to  a whole  series  of  inim- 
ical relations,  is  precisely  this.  If  he  cannot  really 
die,  he  must  make  an  adequate  approach  to  it  by 
‘‘reckoning  himself  dead.'*  Seeing  that,  until  the 
c)  cle  of  his  organic  life  is  complete  he  cannot  die 
physically,  he  must  meantime  die  morally,  reckon- 
ing himself  morally  dead  to  that  environment  which, 
by  competing  for  his  correspondences,  has  now 
become  an  obstacle  to  his  spiritual  life. 

The  variety  of  ways  in  which  the  New  Testament 
wi  Iters  insist  upon  this  somewhat  extraordinary 
method  is  sufficiently  remarkable.  And  although  the 
idi^a  involved  is  essentially  the  same  throughout,  it 


I82 


MORTIFICA  TION. 


will  clearly  illustrate  the  nature  of  the  act  if  we 
examine  separately  three  different  modes  of  expres- 
sion employed  in  the  later  Scriptures  in  this  connec- 
tion. The  methods  by  which  the  spiritual  man  is  to 
withdraw  himself  from  the  old  environment — or  from 
that  part  of  it  which  will  directly  hinder  the  spiritual 
life — are  three  in  number : — 

First,  Suicide. 

Second,  Mortificatioa 

Third,  Limitation. 

It  will  be  found  in  practice  that  these  different 
methods  are  adapted,  respectively,  to  meet  three 
different  forms  of  temptation  ; so  that  we  possess  a 
sufficient  warrant  for  giving  a brief  separate  treat- 
ment to  each. 

First,  Suicide.  Stated  in  undisguised  phraseology, 
the  advice  of  Paul  to  the  Christian,  with  regard  to  a 
part  of  his  nature,  is  to  commit  suicide.  If  the  Chris- 
tian is  to  “ live  unto  God,”  he  must  “ die  unto  sin.” 
If  he  does  not  kill  sin,  sin  will  inevitably  kill  him. 
Recognising  this,  he  must  set  himself  to  reduce  the 
number  of  his  correspondences — retaining  and  de- 
veloping those  which  lead  to  a fuller  life,  uncondition- 
all).  withdrawing  those  which  in  any  way  tend  in  an 
opposite  direction.  This  stoppage  of  correspondences 


MORTIFICA  TION. 


183 


is  a voluntary  act,  a crucifixion  of  the  flesh,  a 
sudi^ide. 

Now  the  least  experience  of  life  will  make  it  evi* 
dent  that  a large  class  of  sins  can  only  be  met,  as 
it  were,  by  Suicide.  The  peculiar  feature  of  Death 
by  Suicide  is  that  it  is  not  only  self-inflicted  but 
sudden.-  And  there  are  many  sins  which  must  either 
be  dealt  with  suddenly  or  not  at  all.  Under  this 
category,  for  instance,  are  to  be  included  generally  all 
sins  of  the  appetites  and  passions.  Other  sins,  from 
their  peculiar  nature,  can  only  be  treated  by  methods 
less  abrupt,  but  the  sudden  operation  of  the  knife  is 
the  only  successful  means  of  dealing  with  fleshly  sins. 
For  example,  the  correspondence  of  the  drunkard 
with  his  wine  is  a thing  which  can  be  broken  off  by 
degrees  only  in  the  rarest  cases.  To  attempt  it 
gradually  may  in  an  isolated  case  succeed,  but  even 
then  the  slightly  prolonged  gratification  is  no  com- 
pensation for  the  slow  torture  of  a gradually  di- 
minishing indulgence.  If  thine  appetite  offend  thee 
cut  it  off/'  may  seem  at  first  but  a harsh  remedy ; 
but  when  we  contemplate  on  the  one  hand  the 
lingering  pain  of  the  gradual  process,  on  the  other 
it5  constant  peril,  we  are  compelled  to  admit  that 
the  principle  is  as  kind  as  it  is  wise.  The  expression 
total  abstinence  " in  such  a case  is  a strictly  bio- 
logical formula.  It  implies  the  sudden  destruction 


184 


MOR  TIFICA  TION. 


of  a definite  portion  of  environment  by  the  total 
withdrawal  of  all  the  connecting  links.  Obviously  of 
course  total  abstinence  ought  thus  to  be  allowed  a 
much  wider  application  than  to  cases  of  “ intemper- 
ance.” It  is  the  only  decisive  method  of  dealing  with 
any  sin  of  the  flesh.  The  very  nature  of  the  relations 
makes  it  absolutely  imperative  that  every  victim  of 
unlawful  appetite,  in  whatever  direction,  shall  totally 
abstain.  Hence  Christ’s  apparently  extreme  and  per- 
emptory language  defines  the  only  possible,  as  well 
as  the  only  charitable,  expedient : If  thy  right  eye 

offend  thee,  pluck  it  out,  and  cast  it  from  thee.  And 
if  thy  right  hand  offend  thee,  cut  it  off,  and  cast  it 
from  thee.” 

The  humanity  of  what  is  called  "sudden  conver- 
sion ” has  never  been  insisted  on  as  it  deserves.  In 
discussing  " Biogenesis  ” ^ it  has  been  already  pointed 
out  that  while  growth  is  a slow  and  gradual  process, 
the  change  from  Death  to  Life  alike  in  the  natural 
and  spiritual  spheres  is  the  work  of  a moment. 
Whatever  the  conscious  hour  of  the  second  birth  may 
be — in  the  case  of  an  adult  it  is  probably  defined  by 
the  first  real  victory  over  sin — it  is  certain  that  on 
biological  principles  the  real  turning-point  is  literally 
a moment  But  on  moral  and  humane  grounds  this 


^ Page  93. 


MOR  TI FI C A TION, 


I8S 

misunderstood,  perverted,  and  therefore  despised  doc- 
trine is  equally  capable  of  defence.  Were  any  re- 
former, with  an  adequate  knowledge  of  human  life,  to 
sit  down  and  plan  a scheme  for  the  salvation  of  sinful 
men,  he  would  probably  come  to  the  conclusion  that 
the  best  way  after  all,  perhaps  indeed  the  only  way, 
to  turn  a sinner  from  the  error  of  his  ways  would  be 
to  do  it  suddenly. 

Suppose  a drunkard  were  advised  to  take  off  one 
portion  from  his  usual  allowance  the  first  week,  an- 
other the  second,  and  so  on!  Or  suppose  at  first 
he  only  allowed  himself  to  become  intoxicated  in  the 
evenings,  then  every  second  evening,  then  only  on 
Saturday  nights,  and  finally  only  every  Christmas  ? 
How  would  a thief  be  reformed  if  he  slowly  reduced 
the  number  of  his  burglaries,  or  a wife-beater  by 
gradually  diminishing  the  number  of  his  blows  ? 
The  argument  ends  with  an  ad  abstirdum,  Let  him 
that  stole  steal  no  morel'  is  the  only  feasible,  the  only 
moral,  and  the  only  humane  way.  This  may  not 
apply  to  every  case,  but  when  any  part  of  man’s 
sinful  life  can  be  dealt  with  by  immediate  Suicide,  to 
make  him  reach  the  end,  even  were  it  possible,  by  a 
lingering  death,  would  be  a monstrous  cruelty.  And 
yet  k is  this  very  thing  in  ‘‘  sudden  conversion,'’  that 
men  object  to— the  sudden  change,  the  decisive 
stand,  the  uncompromising  rupture  with  the  past,  the 


i86 


MOR  TIFICA  TION. 


precipitate  flight  from  sin  as  of  one  escaping  fcr  his 
life  Men  surelf  forget  that  this  is  an  escaping  for 
one’s  life.  Let  the  poor  prisoner  run — madly  and 
blindly  if  he  likes,  for  the  terror  of  Death  is  upon 
him.  -God  knows,  when  the  pause  comes,  how  the 
chains  will  gall  him  still. 

It  is  a peculiarity  of  the  sinful  state,  that  as  a 
general  rule  men  are  linked  to  evil  mainly  by  a 
single  correspondence.  Few  men  break  the  whole 
law.  Our  natures,  fortunately,  are  not  large  enough 
to  make  us  guilty  of  all,  and  the  restraints  of  cir- 
cumstances are  usually  such  as  to  leave  a loophole 
in  the  life  of  each  individual  for  only  a single 
habitual  sin.  But  it  is  very  easy  to  see  how  this 
reduction  of  our  intercourse  with  evil  to  a single 
correspondence  blinds  us  to  our  true  position.  Our 
correspondences,  as  a whole,  are  not  .with  evil,  and 
in  our  calculations  as  to  our  spiritual  condition  we 
emphasize  the  many  negatives  rather  than  the  single 
positive.  One  little  weakness,  we  are  apt  to  fancy, 
all  men  must  be  allowed,  and  we  even  claim  a cer- 
tain indulgence  for  that  apparent  necessity  of  nature 
which  we  call  our  besetting  sin.  Yet  to  break  with 
the  lower  environment  at  all,  to  many,  is  to  break 
at  this  single  point.  It  is  the  only  important  point 
at  which  they  touch  it,  circumstances  or  natural 
disposition  making  habitual  contact  at  other  places 


MORTIFICA  TION. 


187 


impossible.  The  sinful  environment,  in  short,  to 
them  means  a small  but  well-defined  area.  Now  if 
contact  at  this  point  be  not  broken  off,  they  arc 
virtually  in  contact  still  with  the  whole  environment. 
There  may  be  only  one  avenue  between  the  new  life 
and  the  old,  it  may  be  but  a small  and  subterranean 
passage^  but  this  is  sufficient  to  keep  the  old  life  in. 
So  long  as  that  remains  the  victim  is  not  ‘‘dead 
unto  sin,”  and  therefore  he  cannot  “ live  unto  God.” 
Hence  the  reasonableness  of  the  words,  “Whosoever 
shall  keep  the  whole  law,  and  yet  offend  at  one  point, 
he  is  guilty  of  all.”  In  the  natural  world  it  only 
requires  a single  vital  correspondence  of  the  body  to 
be  out  of  order  to  ensure  Death.  It  is  not  necessary 
to  have  consumption,  diabetes,  and  an  aneurism  to 
bring  the  body  to  the  grave  if  it  have  heart-disease. 
He  who  is  fatally  diseased  in  one  organ  necessarily 
pays  the  penalty  with  his  life,  though  all  the  others 
be  in  perfect  health.  And  such,  likewise,  are  the 
mysterious  unity  and  correlation  of  functions  in  the 
spiritual  organism  that  the  disease  of  one  member 
may  involve  the  ruin  of  the  whole.  The  reason, 
therefore,  with  which  Christ  follows  up  the  announce- 
ment His  Doctrine  of  Mutilation,  or  local  Suicide, 
finds  here  at  once  its  justification  and  interpretation : 
“ If  thy  right  eye  offend  thee,  pluck  it  out,  and  cast 
it  from  thee  : for  it  is  profitable  for  thee  that  07te  of 


158 


MO  R TIFICA  TION, 


thy  members  should  perish,  and  not  that  thy  whoh 
body  should  be  cast  into  hell.  And  if  thy  right  hand 
offend  thee,  cut  it  off,  and  cast  it  from  thee  : for  it  ia 
profitable  for  thee  that  one  of  thy  members  should 
perish,  and  not  that  thy  whole  body  should  be  cast 
into  hell.*^ 

Secondly,  Mortification.  The  warrant  for  the  use 
of  this  expression  is  found  in  the  well-known  phrases 
of  Paul,  If  ye  through  the  Spirit  do  mortify  the 
deeds  of  the  body  ye  shall  live,’'  and  “ Mortify  there- 
fore your  members  which  are  upon  earth.”  The 
word  mortify  here  is,  literally,  to  make  to  die.  It  is 
used,  of  course,  in  no  specially  technical  sense ; and 
to  attempt  to  draw  a detailed  moral  from  the  patho- 
logy of  mortification  would  be  equally  fantastic  and 
irrelevant.  But  without  in  any  way  straining  the 
meaning  it  is  obvious  that  we  have  here  a slight 
addition  to  our  conception  of  dying  to  sin.  In  con- 
trast with  Suicide,  Mortification  implies  a gradual 
rather  than  a sudden  process.  The  contexts  in  which 
the  passages  occur  will  make  this  meaning  so  clear, 
and  are  otherwise  so  instructive  in  the  general  connec- 
tion, that  we  may  quote  them,  from  the  New  Version, 
at  length  ; ‘ They  that  are  after  the  flesh  do  mind 
the  things  of  the  flesh  ; but  they  that  are  after  the- 
Spirit  the  things  of  the  Spirit.  For  the  mind  of  the 
flesh  is  death  ; but  the  mind  of  the  Spirit  is  life  and 


MO  R TIFICA  TJON, 


189 

peace : because  the  mind  of  the  flesh  is  enmity 
against  God  ; for  it  is  not  subject  to  the  law  of  God, 
neither  indeed  can  it  be  : and  they  that  are  in  the 
flesh  cannot  please  God.  But  ye  are  not  in  the 
flesh,  but  in  the  Spirit,  if  so  be  that  the  Spirit  oi 
God  dwell  in  you.  But  if  any  man  hath  not  the 
Spirit  of  Christ,  he  is  none  of  His.  And  if  Christ 
is  in  you,  the  body  is  dead  because  of  sin  ; but  the 
Spirit  is  life  because  of  righteousness.  But  if  the 
Spirit  of  Him  that  raised  up  Jesus  from  the  dead 
dwelleth  in  you.  He  that  raised  up  Christ  Jesus  from 
the  dead  shall  quicken  also  your  mortal  bodies 
through  His  Spirit  that  dwelleth  in  you.  So  then, 
brethren,  we  are  debtors  not  to  the  flesh,  to  live 
after  the  flesh  : for  if  ye  live  after  the  flesh  ye  must 
die ; but  if  by  the  Spirit  ye  mortify  the  doings 
(marg.)  of  the  body,  ye  shall  live.’'^ 

And  again,  “ If  then  ye  were  raised  together  with 
Christ,  seek  the  things  that  are  above,  where  Christ 
is  seated  on  the  right  hand  of  God.  Set  your  mind 
on  the  things  that  are  above,  not  on  the  things  that 
are  upon  the  earth.  For  ye  died,  and  your  life  is 
hid  with  Christ  in  God.  When  Christ,  who  is  oui 
life,  shall  be  manifested,  then  shall  ye  also  with  Him 
be  manifested  in  glory.  Mortify  therefore  yotu 


* Rom.  viii.  5--I3- 


190 


MOR  TIFICA  TION. 


members  which  are  upon  the  earth  ; fornication,  un- 
cleanness, passion,  evil  desire,  and  covetousness,  the 
whiwh  is  idolatry;  for  which  things’  sake  cometh 
tho  wrath  of  God  upon  the  sons  of  disobedience ; 
in  the  which  ye  also  walked  aforetime,  when  ye  lived 
in  these  things.  But  now  put  ye  also  away  al^ 
these ; anger,  wrath,  malice,  railing,  shameful  speak- 
ing out  of  your  mouth  : lie  not  one  to  another ; see- 
ing that  ye  have  put  off  the  old  man  with  his  doings, 
and  have  put  on  the  new  man,  which  is  being  renewed 
unto  knowledge  after  the  image  of  Him  that  created 
him.”i 

From  the  nature  of  the  case  as  here  stated  it  is 
evident  that  no  sudden  process  could  entirely  transfer 
a man  from  the  old  into  the  new  relation.  To  break 
altogether,  and  at  every  point,  with  the  old  environ- 
ment, is  a simple  impossibility.  So  long  as  the 
regenerate  man  is  kept  in  this  world,  he  must  find 
the  old  environment  at  many  points  a severe  temp- 
tation. Power  over  very  many  of  the  commonest 
temptations  is  only  to  be  won  by  degrees,  and  how- 
ever anxious  one  might  be  to  apply  the  summary 
method  to  every  case,  he  soon  finds  it  impossible  in 
practice.  The  difficulty  in  these  cases  arises  from  a 
peculiar  feature  of  the  temptation.  The  difference 


^ Col.  iii.  i-io 


MOR  TIFICA  TION, 


191 


between  a sin  of  drunkenness,  and,  let  us  say,  a sin 
of  temper,  is  that  in  the  former  case  the  victim  who 
would  reform  has  mainly  to  deal  with  the  environ* 
ment,  but  in  the  latter  with  the  correspondence. 
The  drunkard’s  temptation  is  a known  and  definite 
quantity.  His  safety  lies  in  avoiding  some  external 
and  material  substance.  Of  course,  at  bottom,  he  is 
really  dealing  with  the  correspondence  every  time  he 
resists ; he  is  distinctly  controlling  appetite.  Never- 
theless it  is  less  the  appetite  that  absorbs  his  mind 
than  the  environment.  And  so  long  as  he  can  keep 
himself  clear  of  the  external  relation,”  to  use  Mr. 
Herbert  Spencer’s  phraseology,  he  has  much  less  dif- 
ficulty with  the  ^^internal  relation.”  The  ill-tempered 
person,  on  the  other  hand,  can  make  very  little  of  his 
environment.  However  he  may  attempt  to  circum- 
scribe it  in  certain  directions,  there  will  always  re- 
main a wide  and  ever-changing  area  to  stimulate 
his  irascibility.  His  environment,  in  short,  is  an  in- 
constant quantity,  and  his  most  elaborate  calcula- 
tions and  precautions  must  often  and  suddenly  fail 
him. 

What  he  has  to  deal  with,  then,  mainly  is  the 
correspondence,  the  temper  itself.  And  that,  he 
well  knows,  involves  a long  and  humiliating  dis- 
cipline. The  case  now  is  not  at  all  a surgical  but 
a medical  one,  and  the  knife  is  here  of  no  more  use 


192 


MOR  TIFICA  TJON. 


than  in  a fever.  A specific  irritant  has  poisoned  his 
veins.  And  the  acrid  humours  that  are  breaking  out 
all  over  the  surface  of  his  life  are  only  to  be  subdued 
by  a gradual  sweetening  of  the  inward  spirit  It  is 
now  known  that  the  human  body  acts  towards  certain 
fever-germs  as  a sort  of  soil.  The  man  whose  blood 
is  pure  has  nothing  to  fear  So  he  whose  spirit  is 
purified  and  sweetened  becomes  proof  against  these 
germs  of  sin.  “ Anger,  wrath,  malice  and  railing  ” 
in  such  a soil  can  find  no  root 

The  difference  between  this  and  the  former  method 
of  dealing  with  sin  may  be  illustrated  by  another 
analogy.  The  two  processes  depend  upon  two 
different  natural  principles.  The  Mutilation  of  a 
member,  for  instance,  finds  its  analogue  in  the  horti- 
cultural operation  of  prunmgy  where  the  object  is  to 
divert  life  from  a useless  into  a useful  channel.  A 
part  of  a plant  which  previously  monopolised  a large 
share  of  the  vigour  of  the  total  organism,  but  with- 
out yielding  any  adequate  return,  is  suddenly  cut  off, 
so  that  the  vital  processes  may  proceed  more  actively 
in  some  fruitful  parts.  Christ's  use  of  this  figure  is 
well-known : “ Every  branch  in  Me  that  beareth  not 
fruit  He  purgeth  it  that  it  may  bring  forth  more 
fruit."  The  strength  of  the  plant,  that  is,  being  given 
to  the  formation  of  mere  wood,  a number  of  useless 
correspondences  hav^  to  be  abruptly  closed  while  the 


MOR  TIFICA  TION, 


193 


useful  connections  are  allowed  to  remain.  The 
Mortification  of  a member,  again,  is  based  on  the  Law 
of  Degeneration.  The  useless  member  here  is  not 
cut  off,  but  simply  relieved  as  much  as  possible  of  all 
exercise.  This  encourages  the  gradual  decay  of  the 
parts,  and  as  it  is  more  and  more  neglected  it  ceases 
to  be  a channel  for  life  at  all.  So  an  organism 
“ mortifies  ” its  members. 

Thirdly,  Limitation.  While  a large  number  of 
correspondences  between  man  and  his  environment 
can  be  stopped  in  these  ways,  there  are  many  more 
which  neither  can  be  reduced  by  a gradual  Mortifi- 
cation nor  cut  short  by  sudden  Death.  One  reason 
for  this  is  that  to  tamper  with  these  correspondences 
might  involve  injury  to  closely  related  vital  parts. 
Or,  again,  there  are  organs  which  are  really  essential 
to  the  normal  life  of  th^  orgaiiism,  and  which  there- 
fore the  organism  cannot  afford  to  lose  even  though 
at  times  they  act  prejudicially.  Not  a few  corre- 
spondences, for  instance,  are  not  wrong  in  themselves 
but  only  in  their  extremes.  Up  to  a certain  point 
they  are  lawful  and  necessary  ; beyond  that  point 
they  may  become  not  only  unnecessary  but  sinful. 
The  appropriate  treatment  in  these  an3  similar  cases 
consists  in  a process  of  limitation.  The  perform- 
ance of  this  operation,  it  must  be  confessed,  rr^uires 
a most  delicate  hand.  It  is  an  art,  moreover,  which 


O 


194 


MORTIFICA  TION. 


no  one  can  teach  another.  And  yet,  if  it  is  not 
learned  by  all  who  are  trying  to  lead  the  Christian 
life,  it  cannot  be  for  want  of  practice.  For,  as  we 
shall  see,  the  Christian  is  called  upon  to  exercise 
few  things  more  frequently. 

An  easy  illustration  of  a correspondence  which  w 
only  wrong  when  carried  to  an  extreme,  is  the  love 
of  money.  The  love  of  money  up  to  a certain  point 
is  a necessity  ; beyond  that  it  may  become  one  of 
the  worst  of  sins.  Christ  said:  ‘^Ye  cannot  serve 
God  and  Mammon,”  The  two  services,  at  a definite 
point,  become  incompatible,  and  hence  correspond- 
ence with  one  must  cease.  At  what  point,  however, 
it  must  cease  each  man  has  to  determine  for  himself. 
And  in  this  consists  at  once  the  difficulty  and  the 
dignity  of  Limitation. 

There  is  another  class  of  cases  where  the  adjust- 
ments are  still  more  difficult  to  determine.  Innumer- 
able points  exist  in  our  surroundings  with  which  it 
is  perfectly  legitimate  to  enjoy,  and  even  to  cultivate, 
correspondence,  but  which  privilege,  at  the  same 
time,  it  were  better  on  the  whole  that  we  did  not 
use.  Circumstances  are  occasionally  such  — the 
demands  of  ofhers  upon  us,  for  example,  may  be  so 
clamant — that  we  have  voluntarily  to  reduce  the 
area  of  legitimate  pleasure.  Or,  instead  of  it  coming 
from  others,  the  claim  may  come  from  a still  higher 


MORTIFICA  TIOISr. 


>95 


direction  Man^s  spiritual  life  consists  in  the  number 
and  fulness  of  his  correspondences  with  God.  In 
order  to  develop  these  he  may  be  constrained  to 
insulate  them,  to  enclose  them  from  the  other  cor» 
respondences,  to  shut  himself  in  with  them.  Ii 
many  ways  the  limitation  of  the  natural  life  is  the 
necessary  condition  of  the  full  enjoyment  of  the 
spiritual  life. 

In  this  principle  lies  the  true  philosophy  of  self- 
denial.  No  man  is  called  to  a life  of  self-denial  for 
its  own  sake.  It  is  in  order  to  a compensation  which, 
though  sometimes  difficult  to  see,  is  always  real  and 
always  proportionate.  No  truth,  perhaps,  in  practical 
religion  is  more  lost  sight  of.  We  cherish  somehow 
a lingering  rebellion  against  the  doctrine  of  self- 
denial — as  if  our  nature,  or  our  circumstances,  or  our 
conscience,  dealt  with  us  severely  in  loading  us  with 
the  daily  cross.  But  is  it  not  plain  after  all  that 
the  life  of  self-denial  is  the  more  abundant  life — 
more  abundant  just  in  proportion  to  the  ampler 
crucifixion  of  the  narrower  life  ? Is  it  not  a clear 
case  of  exchange — an  exchange  however  where  the 
advantage  is  entirely  on  our  side  ? We  give  up 
% correspondence  in  which  there  is  a little  life  to 
enjoy  a correspondence  in  which  there  is  an  abundant 
life.  What  though  we  sacrifice  a hundred  such 
correspondences.^  We  make  but  the  more  room 


MOR  TIFICA  TION. 


196 

for  the  great  one  that  is  left.  The  lesson  of  self- 
denial,  that  is  to  say  of  Limitation,  is  conc£7itration. 
Do  not  spoil  your  life,  it  says,  at  the  outset  with 
unworthy  and  impoverishing  correspondences  ; and  if 
it  is  growing  truly  rich  and  abundant,  be  very  jealous 
of  ever  diluting  its  high  eternal  quality  with  anything 
of  earth.  To  concentrate  upon  a few  great  corre- 
spondences, to  oppose  to  the  death  the  perpetual 
petty  larceny  of  our  life  by  trifles — these  are  the 
conditions  for  the  highest  and  happiest  life.  It  is 
only  Limitation  which  can  secure  the  Illimitable. 

The  penalty  of  evading  self-denial  also  is  just  that 
we  get  the  lesser  instead  of  the  larger  good.  The 
punishment  of  sin  is  inseparably  bound  up  with 
itself.  To  refuse  to  deny  one’s  self  is  just  to  be  left 
with  the  self  undenied.  When  the  balance  of  life 
is  struck,  the  self  will  be  found  still  there.  The 
discipline  of  life  was  meant  to  destroy  this  self,  but 
that  discipline  having  been  evaded — and  we  all  to 
some  extent  have  opportunities,  and  too  often  exer- 
cise them,  of  taking  the  narrow  path  by  the  shortest 
cuts — its  purpose  is  baulked.  But  the  soul  is  the 
loser.  In  seeking  to  gain  its  life  it  has  really  lost  it 
This  is  what  Christ  meant  when  He  said  : ‘‘  He  that 
ioveth  his  life  shall  lose  it,  and  he  that  hateth  his 
life  in  this  world  shall  keep  it  unto  life  eternal.*' 

Why  does  Christ  say  : “ Hate  Life  *’  ? Does  He 


MOR  TIFICA 1 ION. 


197 


mean  that  life  is  a sin  ? No.  Life  is  not  a sin. 
Still,  He  says  we  must  hate  it  But  we  must  live. 
Why  should  we  hate  what  we  must  do  ? For  this 
reason  : Life  is  not  a sin,  but  the  love  of  life  may  be 
a sin  And  the  best  way  not  to  love  life  is  to  hate 
it  Is  it  a sin  then  to  love  life.?  Not  a sin  exactly, 
but  a mistake.  It  is  a sin  to  love  some  life,  a 
mistake  to  love  the  rest.  Because  that  love  is  lost. 
All  that  is  lavished  on  it  is  lost,  Christ  does  not 
say  it  is  wrong  to  love  life.  He  simply  says  it  is 
loss.  Each  man  has  only  a certain  amount  of  life, 
of  time,  of  attention — a definite  measurable  quantity. 
If  he  gives  any  of  it  to  this  life  solely  it  is  wasted. 
Therefore  Christ  says.  Hate  life,  limit  life,  lest  you 
steal  your  love  for  it  from  something  that  deserves  it 
more. 

Now  this  does  not  apply  to  all  life.  It  is  “ life  in 
this  world  ” that  is  to  be  hated.  For  life  in  this 
world  implies  conformity  to  this  world.  It  may  not 
mean  pursuing  worldly  pleasures,  or  mixing  with 
worldly  sets ; but  a subtler  thing  than  that — a silent 
deference  to  worldly  opinion  ; an  almost  unconscious 
lowering  of  religious  tone  to  the  level  of  the  worldly- 
religious  world  around  ; a subdued  resistance  to  the 
soul's  delicate  promptings  to  greater  consecration, 
out  of  deference  to  “ breadth  " or  fear  of  ridicule. 
These,  and  such  things,  are  what  Christ  tells  us  we 


198 


MOR  TIFICA  no  N. 


must  hate.  For  these  things  are  of  the  very  essence 
of  worldliness.  If  any  man  love  the  world,”  even 
ir  this  sense,  *‘the  love  of  the  Father  is  not  in  him.” 

There  are  two  ways  of  hating  life,  a true  and  a 
false.  Some  men  hate  life  because  it  hates  them. 
They  have  seen  through  it,  and  it  has  turned  round 
upon  them.  They  have  drunk  it,  and  come  to  the 
dregs ; therefore  they  hate  it.  This  is  one  of  the 
ways  in  which  the  man  who  loves  his  life  literally 
loses  it.  He  loves  it  till  he  loses  it,  then  he  hates  it 
because  it  has  fooled  him.  The  other  way  is  the 
religious.  For  religious  reasons  a man  deliberately 
braces  himself  to  the  systematic  hating  of  his  life. 
* No  man  can  serve  two  masters,  for  either  he  must 
hate  the  one  and  love  the  other,  or  else  he  must  hold 
to  the  one  and  despise  the  other.”  Despising  the 
other — this  is  hating  life,  limiting  life.  It  is  not 
misanthropy,  but  Christianity. 

This  principle,  as  has  been  said,  contains  the  true 
philosophy  of  self-denial.  It  also  holds  the  secret 
by  which  self-denial  may  be  most  easily  borne.  A 
common  conception  of  self-denial  is  that  there  are 
a multitude  of  things  about  life  which  are  to  be  put 
down  with  a high  hand  the  moment  they  make  their 
appearance.  They  are  temptations  which  are  not  to 
be  tolerated,  but  must  be  instantly  crushed  out  of 
being  with  pang  and  effort 


MOR  TIFICA  TION. 


199 


So  life  comes  to  be  a constant  and  sore  cutting  off 
Di’  things  which  we  love  as  our  right  hand.  But  now 
suppose  one  tried  boldly  to  hate  these  things  ? 
Suppose  we  deliberately  made  up  our  minds  as  to 
what  things  we  were  henceforth  to  allow  to  become 
our  life } Suppose  we  selected  a given  area  of  our 
environment  and  determined  once  for  all  that  our 
correspondences  should  go  to  that^alone,  fencing  in 
this  area  all  round  with  a morally  impassable  wall  ? 
True,  to  others,  we  should  seem  to  live  a poorer 
life;  they  would  see  that  our  environment  was  cir- 
cumscribed, and  call  us  narrow  because  it  was  narrow. 
But,  well-chosen,  this  limited  life  would  be  really  the 
fullest  life ; it  would  be  rich  in  the  highest  and 
worthiest,  and  poor  in  the  smallest  and  basest  cor- 
respondences. The  well-defined  spiritual  life  is  not 
only  the  highest  life,  but  it  is  also  the  most  easily 
lived.  The  whole  cross  is  more  easily  carried  than 
the  half.  It  is  the  man  who  tries  to  make  the  best  of 
both  worlds  who  makes  nothing  of  either.  And  he 
who  seeks  to  serve  two  masters  misses  the  bene- 
diction of  both.  But  he  who  has  taken  his  stand, 
who  has  drawn  a boundary  line,  sharp  and  deep 
about  his  religious  life,  who  has  marked  all 
beyond  as  for  ever  forbidden  ground  to  him,  finds 
the  yoke  easy  and  the  burden  light.  For  this  for- 
bidden environment  comes  to  be  as  if  it  were  not 


200 


MOR  TIFICA  TION, 


His  faculties  falling  out  of  correspondence,  slowly 
lose  their  sensibilities.  And  the  balm  x)f  Death 
numbing  his  lower  nature  releases  him  for  the  scarce 
disturbed  communion  of  a higher  life.  So  even  here 
♦-0  die  is  gain. 


ETERNAL  LIFE» 


® Supposing  that  many  in  some  formy  is  permitted  to  remain 
m the  earth  for  a long  series  of  years,  we  merely  lengthen 
out  the  period,  but  we  cannot  escape  the  final  catastrophe. 
The  earth  will  gradually  lose  its  energy  of  rotation,  as  well 
as  that  of  revolution  round  the  sun.  The  sun  himself  will 
wax  dim  and  become  useless  as  a source  of  energy,  until  at 
last  the  favourable  conditions  of  the  i)resenf  wlar  system  wiU 
have  quite  disappeared 

But  what  happens  to  our  system  will  happen  likewise  to 
the  whole  visible  universe,  which  will,  if  finite,  become  a 
lifeless  mass,  if  indeed  it  be  not  doomed  to  utter  dissolution. 
In  fine,  it  will  become  old  and  efipete,  no  less  truly  than  the 
individual.  It  is  a glorious  garment,  this  visible  universe, 
but  not  an  immortal  one.  We  must  look  elsewhere  if  we  an 
to  be  dothed  with  immortaluy  as  with  a garment! 

The  Unseen  Univeb.se. 


ETERNAL  LIFE. 


••  This  is  Life  Eternal — that  they  might  know  Thee,  the  Tfu« 
God,  and  Jesus  Christ  whom  Thou  hast  sent.” — Jesus  Chfist, 

Perfect  correspondence  would  be  perfect  life.  Were  there 
no  changes  in  the  environment  but  such  as  the  organism  had 
adapted  changes  to  meet,  and  were  it  never  to  fail  in  the  effi- 
ciency with  which  it  met  them,  there  would  be  eternal  existence 
and  eternal  knowledge.” — Herbert  Spencer, 

One  of  the  most  startling  achievements  of  recent 
science  is  a definition  of  Eternal  Life.  To  the  reli- 
gious mind  this  is  a contribution  of  immense  moment. 
For  eighteen  hundred  years  only  one  definition  of 
Life  Eternal  was  before  the  world.  Now  there  are 
two. 

Through  all  these  centuries  revealed  religion  had 
this  doctrine  to  itself.  Ethics  had  a voice,  as  well 
as  Christianity,  on  the  question  of  the  summum 
bonum ; Philosophy  ventured  to  speculate  on  the 
Being  of  a God.  But  no  source  outside  Christianity 
contributed  anything  to  the  doctrine  of  Eternal  Life. 
Apart  from  Revelation,  this  great  truth  was  un- 
guaranteed. It  was  the  one  thing  in  the  Christian 


204 


ETERNAL  LIFE. 


system  that  most  needed  verification  from  without, 
yet  none  was  forthcoming.  And  never  has  any 
further  light  been  thrown  upon  the  question  why  in 
its  very  nature  the  Christian  Life  should  be  Eternal 
Christianity  itself  even  upon  this  point  has  been 
obscure.  Its  decision  upon  the  bare  fact  is  authori- 
tative and  specific.  But  as  to  what  there  is  in  the 
Spiritual  Life  necessarily  endowing  it  with  the 
element  of  Eternity,  the  maturest  theology  is  all  but 
silent 

It  has  been  reserved  for  modern  biology  at  once 
to  defend  and  illuminate  this  central  truth  of  the 
Christian  faith.  And  hence  in  the  interests  of  reli- 
gion, practical  and  evidential,  this  second  and  scientific 
definition  of  Eternal  Life  is  to  be  hailed  as  an 
announcement  of  commanding  interest.  Why  it 
should  not  yet  have  received  the  recognition  of 
religious  thinkers — for  already  it  has  lain  some  years 
unnoticed — is  not  difficult  to  understand.  The  belief 
in  Science  as  an  aid  to  faith  is  not  yet  ripe  enough 
to  warrant  men  in  searching  there  for  witnesses  to 
the  highest  Christian  truths.  The  inspiration  of 
Nature,  it  is  thought,  extends  to  the  humbler  doc- 
trines alone.  And  yet  the  reverent  inquirer  who 
guides  his  steps  in  the  right  direction  may  find  even 
now  in  the  still  dim  twilight  of  the  scientific  world 
much  that  will  illuminate  and  intensify  his  sublimes! 


ETERNAL  LIFE. 


205 


faith.  Here,  at  least,  comes,  and  comes  unbidden, 
the  opportunity  of  testing  the  most  vital  point  of  the 
Christian  system.  Hitherto  the  Christian  philo- 
sopher has  remained  content  with  the  scientific  evi* 
dence  against  Annihilation.  Or,  with  Butler,  he  has 
reasoned  from  the  Metamorphoses  of  Insects  to  a 
future  life.  Or  again,  with  the  authors  of  ‘‘  The 
Unseen  Universe,”  the  apologist  has  constructed 
elaborate,  and  certainly  impressive,  arguments  upon 
the  Law  of  Continuity.  But  now  we  may  draw  nearer. 
For  the  first  time  Science  touches  Christianity  posi- 
tively  on  the  doctrine  of  Immortality.  It  confronts 
us  with  an  actual  definition  of  an  Eternal  Life, 
based  on  a full  and  rigidly  accurate  examination  01 
the  necessary  conditions.  Science  does  not  pretend 
that  it  can  fulfil  these  conditions.  Its  votaries  make 
no  claim  to  possess  the  Eternal  Life.  It  simply 
postulates  the  requisite  conditions  without  concern- 
ing itself  whether  any  organism  should  ever  appear, 
or  does  now  exist,  which  might  fulfil  them.  The 
claim  of  religion,  on  the  other  hand,  is  that  there  are 
organisms  which  possess  Eternal  Life.  And  the 
problem  for  us  to  solve  is  this  ; Do  those  who  pro- 
fess to  possess  Eternal  Life  fulfil  the  conditions 
required  by  Science,  or  are  they  different  conditions  ? 
In  a word,  Is  the  Christian  conception  of  Eternal 
Life  scientific  ? 


206 


ETERNAL  LIFE, 


It  may  be  unnecessary  to  notice  at  the  outset  that 
the  definition  of  Eternal  Life  drawn  up  by  Science 
was  framed  without  reference  to  religion.  It  must 
indeed  have  been  the  last  thought  with  the  thinker 
to  whom  we  chiefly  owe  it,  that  in  unfolding  the 
conception  of  a Life  in  its  very  nature  necessarily 
eternal,  he  was  contributing  to  Theology. 

Mr.  Herbert  Spencer — for  it  is  to  him  we  owe  it — 
would  be  the  first  to  admit  the  impartiality  of  his 
definition ; and  from  the  connection  in  which  it 
occurs  in  his  writings,  it  is  obvious  that  religion  was 
not  even  present  to  his  mind.  He  is  analysing  with 
minute  care  the  relations  between  Environment  and 
Life.  He  unfolds  the  principle  according  to  which 
Life  is  high  or  low,  long  or  short.  He  shows  why 
organisms  live  and  why  they  die.  And  finally  he 
defines  a condition  of  things  in  which  an  organism 
would  never  die — in  which  it  would  enjoy  a perpetual 
and  perfect  Life.  This  to  him  is,  of  course,  but  a 
speculation.  Life  Eternal  is  a biological  conceit. 
The  conditions  necessary  to  an  Eternal  Life  do  not 
exist  in  the  natural  world.  So  that  the  definition  is 
altogether  impartial  and  independent;  A Perfect 
Life,  to  Science,  is  simply  a thing  which  is  theoreti- 
cally possible — like  a Perfect  Vacuum. 

Before  giving,  in  so  many  words,  the  definition  ol 
Mr.  Herbert  Spencer,  it  will  render  it  fully  intelli- 


ETERNAL  LIFE, 


207 


gible  if  we  gradually  lead  up  to  it  by  a brief  le- 
hearsal  of  the  few  and  simple  biological  facts  on 
which  it  is  based.  In  considering  the  subject  of 
Death,  we  have  formerly  seen  that  there  are 
degrees  of  Life.  By  this  is  meant  that  some  liver 
have  more  and  fuller  correspondeTice  with  Environ- 
ment than  others.  The  amount  of  correspondence, 
again,  is  determined  by  the  greater  or  less  complex- 
ity of  the  organism.  Thus  a simple  organism  like 
the  Amoeba  is  possessed  of  very  few  correspondences. 
It  is  a mere  sac  of  transparent  structureless  jelly  for 
which  organization  has  done  almost  nothing,  and 
hence  it  can  only  communicate  with  the  smallest 
possible  area  of  Environment.  An  insect,  in  virtue 
of  its  more  complex  structure,  corresponds  with  a 
wider  area.  Nature  has  endowed  it  with  special 
faculties  for  reaching  out  to  the  Environment  on 
many  sides ; it  has  more  life  than  the  Amoeba.  In 
other  words,  it  is  a higher  animal.  Man  again, 
whose  body  is  still  further  differentiated,  or  broken 
up  into  different  correspondences,  finds  himself 
rapport  with  his  surroundings  to  a further  extent. 
And  therefor®  he  is  higher  still,  more  living  still 
And  this  law,  that  the  degree  of  Life  varies  with  the 
degree  of  correspondence,  holds  to  the  minutest 
detail  throughout  the  entire  range  of  living  things. 
Life  becomes  fuller  and  fuller,  richer  and  richer,  more 


2o8 


ETERNAL  LIFE 


and  more  sensitive  and  responsive  to  an  ever* 
widening  Environment  as  we  rise  in  the  chain  of 
being. 

Now  it  will  speedily  appear  that  a distinct  rela- 
tion exists,  and  must  exist,  between  complexity 
and  longevity.  Death  being  brought  about  by  the 
failure  of  an  organism  to  adjust  itself  to  some 
change  in  the  Environment,  it  follows  that  those 
organisms  which  are  able  to  adjust  themselves  most 
readily  and  successfully  will  live  the  longest.  They 
will  continue  time  after  time  to  effect  the  appro- 
priate adjustment,  and  their  power  of  doing  so  will 
be  exactly  proportionate  to  their  complexity — that 
is,  to  the  amount  of  Environment  they  can  control 
with  their  correspondences.  There  are,  for  example, 
in  the  Environment  of  every  animal  certain  things 
which  are  directly  or  indirectly  dangerous  to  Life. 
If  its  equipment  of  correspondences  is  not  com- 
plete enough  to  enable  it  to  avoid  these  dangers 
in  all  possible  circumstances,  it  must  sooner  or 
later  succumb.  The  organism  then  with  the  most 
perfect  set  of  correspondences,  that  is,  the  highest 
and  most  complex  organism,  has  an  obvious  advan- 
tage over  less  complex  forms.  It  can  adjust  itself 
more  perfectly  and  frequently.  But  this  is  just 
the  biological  way  of  saying  that  it  can  live  the 
longest.  And  hence  the  relation  between  com* 


ETERNAL  LIFE. 


S09 


plexity  and  longevity  may  be  expressed  thus — the 
most  complex  organisms  are  the  longest  lived. 

To  state  and  illustrate  the  proposition  conversely 
may  make  the  point  still  further  clear.  The  less 
highly  organized  an  animal  is,  the  less  will  be  its 
chance  of  remaining  in  lengthened  correspondence 
with  its  Environment.  At  some  time  or  other  in 
its  career  circumstances  are  sure  to  occur  to  which 
the  comparatively  immobile  organism  finds  itself 
structurally  unable  to  respond.  Thus  a Medusa 
tossed  ashore  by  a wave,  finds  itself  so  out  of  cor- 
respondence with  its  new  surroundings  that  its  life 
must  pay  the  forfeit.  Had  it  been  able  by  internal 
change  to  adapt  itself  to  external  change — to  cor- 
respond sufficiently  with  the  new  environment,  as 
for  example  to  crawl,  as  an  eel  would  have  done, 
back  into  that  environment  with  which  it  had* 
completer  correspondence — its  life  might  have  been 
spared.  But  had  this  happened  it  would  continue 
to  live  henceforth  only  so  long  as  it  could  continue 
in  correspondence  with  all  the  circumstances  in 
which  it  might  find  itself  Even  if,  however,  it 
became  complex  enough  to  resist  the  ordinary  and 
direct  dangers  of  its  environment,  it  might  still  be 
out  of  correspondence  with  others.  A naturalist 
for  instance,  might  take  advantage  of  its  want  of 
correspondence  with  particular  sights  and  sound: 


P 


210 


ETERNAL  LIFE. 


capture  it  for  his  cabinet,  or  the  sudden  dropping 
of  a yacht's  anchor  or  the  turn  of  a screw  might 
cause  its  untimely  death. 

Again,  in  the  case  of  a bird  in  virtue  of  its 
more  complex  organization,  there  is  command  over 
a much  larger  area  of  environment.  It  can  take 
precautions  such  as  the  Medusa  could  not ; it  has 
increased  facilities  for  securing  food  ; its  adjust- 
ments all  round  are  more  complex ; and  therefore 
it  ought  to  be  able  to  maintain  its  Life  for  a longei 
period.  There  is  still  a large  area,  however,  over 
which  it  has  no  control.  Its  pov/er  of  internal 
change  is  not  complete  enough  to  afford  it  perfect 
correspondence  with  all  external  changes,  and  its 
tenure  of  Life  is  to  that  extent  insecure.  Its  cor- 
respondence, moreover,  is  limited  even  with  regard 
*to  those  external  conditions  with  which  it  has  been 
partially  established.  Thus  a bird  in  ordinary  cir- 
cumstances has  no  difficulty  in  adapting  itself  to 
changes  of  temperature,  but  if  these  are  varied 
beyond  the  point  at  which  its  capacity  of  adjust- 
ment begins  to  fail — for  example,  during  an  extreme 
winter — the  organism  being  unable  to  meet  the  con- 
dition must  perish.  The  human  organism,  on  the 
other  hand,  can  respond  to  this  external  condition, 
a^s  well  as  to  countless  other  vicissitudes  under 
which  lower  forms  would  inevitably  succumb.  Man’s 


ETERNAL  LIFE. 


21] 


adjustments  are  to  the  largest  known  area  of  En- 
vironment, and  hence  he  ought  to  be  able  furthest 
to  prolong  his  Life. 

It  becomes  evident,  then,  that  as  we  ascend  in 
the  scale  of  Life  we  rise  also  in  the  scale  of  lon- 
gevity. The  lowest  organisms  are,  as  a rule,  short- 
lived, and  the  rate  of  mortality  diminishes  more 
or  less  regularly  as  we  ascend  in  the  animal  scale. 
So  extraordinary  indeed  is  the  mortality  among 
lowly-organized  forms  that  in  most  cases  a compen- 
sation is  actually  provided,  nature  endowing  them 
with  a marvellously  increased  fertility  in  order  to 
guard  against  absolute  extinction.  Almost  all  lower 
forms  are  furnished  not  only  with  great  reproduc- 
tive powers,  but  with  different  methods  of  propa- 
gation, by  which,  in  various  circumstances,  and  in 
an  incredibly  short  time,  the  species  can  be  indefi- 
nitely multiplied.  Ehrenberg  found  that  by  the 
repeated  subdivisions  of  a single  Paramecium,  no 
fewer  than  268,000,000  similar  organisms  might  be 
pioduced  in  one  month.  This  power  steadily  de- 
creaseb  as  we  rise  higher  in  the  scale,  until  forms 
are  reached  in  which  one,  two,  or  at  most  three, 
come  into  being  at  a birth.  It  decreases,  however 
because  it  is  no  longer  needed.  These  forms  have 
a much  longer  lease  of  Life.  And  it  may  be  taken 
as  a rule,  although  it  has  exceptions,  that  com- 


212 


ETERNAL  LIFE, 


plexity  in  animal  organisms  is  always  associated 
with  longevity. 

It  may  be  objected  that  these  illustrations  are 
taken  merely  from  morbid  conditions.  But  whether 
the  Life  be  cut  short  by  accident  or  by  disease 
the  principle  is  the  same.  All  dissolution  is  brought 
about  practically  in  the  same  way.  A cc  rtain  con- 
dition in  the  Environment  fails  to  be  met  by  a 
corresponding  condition  in  the  organism,  and  this 
is  death.  And  conversely  the  more  an  organism  in 
virtue  of  its  complexity  can  adapt  itself  to  all  the 
parts  of  its  Environment,  the  longer  it  will  live. 
" It  is  manifest  a priori^'  says  Mr.  Herbert  Spencer, 
‘‘that  since  changes  in  the  physical  state  of  the 
environment,  as  also  those  mechanical  actions  and 
those  variations  of  available  food  which  occur  in 
it,  are  liable  to  stop  the  processes  going  on  in  the 
organism ; and  since  the  adaptive  changes  in  the 
organism  have  the  effects  of  directly  or  indirectly 
counterbalancing  these  changes  in  the  environment, 
it  follows  that  the  life  of  the  organism  will  be  short 
or  long,  low  or  high,  according  to  the  extent  tc 
which  changes  in  the  environment  are  met  by  cor- 
responding changes  in  the  organism.  Allowing  a 
margin  for  perturbations,  the  life  will  continue  only 
while  the  correspondence  continues ; the  com- 
pleteness of  the  life  will  be  proportionate  to  the 


ETERNAL  LIFE. 


213 


completeness  of  the  correspondence  ; and  the  life 
will  be  perfect  only  when  the  correspondence  ia 
pel  feet’' ^ 

We  are  now  all  but  in  sight  of  our  scientific  defi- 
nition of  Eternal  Life.  The  desideratum  is  an  organ- 
ism with  a correspondence  of  a very  exceptional 
kind.  It  must  lie  beyond  the  reach  of  those  ‘‘  me- 
chanical actions”  and  those ‘‘ variations  of  available 
food,”  which  are  liable  to  stop  the  processes  going 
on  in  the  organism.”  Before  we  reach  an  Eternal 
Life  we  must  pass  beyond  that  point  at  which  all 
ordinary  correspondences  inevitably  cease.  We 
must  find  an  organism  so  high  and  complex,  that  at 
some  point  in  its  development  it  shall  have  added  a 
correspondence  which  organic  death  is  powerless  to 
a’' rest.  We  must  in  short  pass  beyond  that  finite 
region  where  the  correspondences  depend  on  evan- 
escent and  material  media,  and  enter  a further  region 
where  the  Environment  corresponded  with  is  itself 
Eternal.  Such  an  Environment  exists.  The  En- 
vironment of  the  Spiritual  world  is  outside  the 
influence  of  these  mechanical  actions,”  which  sooner 
or  later  interrupt  the  processes  going  on  in  all  finite 
organisms.  If  then  we  can  find  an  organism  which 
has  established  a correspondence  with  the  spiritual 


^ Principles  of  Biology,’^  p.  82. 


214  E TERNAL  LIFE. 

world,  that  correspondence  will  possess  the  elements 
of  eternity — provided  only  one  other  condition  be 
fulfilled. 

That  condition  is  that  the  Environment  be  perfect 
If  it  is  not  perfect,  if  it  is  not  the  highest,  if  it  is 
endowed  with  the  finite  quality  of  change,  there  can 
be  no  guarantee  that  the  Life  of  its  correspondents 
will  be  eternal.  Some  change  might  occur  in  it 
which  the  correspondents  had  no  adaptive  changes 
to  meet,  and  Life  would  cease.  But  grant  a spiritual 
organism  in  perfect  correspondence  with  a perfect 
spiritual  Environment,  and  the  conditions  necessary 
to  Eternal  Life  are  satisfied. 

The  exact  terms  of  Mr.  Herbert  Spencer’s  defini- 
tion of  Eternal  Life  may  now  be  given.  And  it  will 
be  seen  that  they  include  essentially  the  conditions 
here  laid  down.  Perfect  correspondence  would  be 
perfect  life.  Were  there  no  changes  in  the  environ- 
ment but  such  as  the  organism  had  adapted  changes 
to  meet,  and  were  it  never  to  fail  in  the  efficiency 
with  which  it  met  them,  there  would  be  eternal 
existence  and  eternal  knowledge.”  ^ Reserving  the 
question  as  to  the  possible  fulfilment  of  these  con- 
ditions, let  us  turn  for  a moment  to  the  definition  of 
Eternal  Life  laid  down  by  Christ.  Let  us  place  it 


* “ Principles  of  Biology/^  p.  88. 


ETERNAL  LIFE. 


2IS 

alongside  the  definition  of  Science,  and  mark  the 
points  of  contact.  Uninterrupted  correspondence 
with  a perfect  Environment  is  Eternal  Life  according 
lo  Science.  “ This  is  Life  Eternal,”  said  Christ, 
“that  they  may  know  Thee,  the  only  true  God,  and 
Jesus  Christ  whom  Thou  hast  sent.”  ^ Life  Eternal 
is  to  know  God.  To  know  God  is  to  “ correspond  ” 
with  God.  To  correspond  with  God  is  to  correspond 
with  a Perfect  Environment./  And  the  organism 
which  attains  to  this,  in  the  nature  of  things  must 
live  for  ever.  Here  is  “ eternal  existence  and  eternal 
knowledge.” 

The  main  point  of  agreement  between  the  scientific 
and  the  religious  definition  is  that  Life  consists  in  a 
peculiar  and  personal  relation  defined  as  a “corre- 
spondence.” This  conception,  that  Life  consists  in 
correspondences,  has  been  so  abundantly  illustrated 
already  that  it  is  now  unnecessary  to  discuss  it 
further.  All  Life  indeed  consists  essentially  in 
correspondences  with  various  Environments.  The 
artist’s  life  is  a correspondence  with  art ; the  musi- 
cian’s with  music.  To  cut  them  off  from  these  En- 
vironments is  in  that  relation  to  cut  off  their  Life. 
To  be  cut  off  from  all  Environment  is  death.  To 
find  a new  Environment  again  and  cultivate  relation 


^ John  xvii 


ETERNAL  LIFE, 


Zi6 


with  it  is  to  find  a new  Life.  To  live  is  to  corre- 
spond, and  to  correspond  is  to  live.  So  much  is  true 
in  Science.  But  it  is  also  true  in  Religion.  And  it 
is  of  great  importance  to  observe  that  to  Religion 
also  the  conception  of  Life  is  a correspondence.  No 
truth  of  Christianity  has  been  more  ignorantly  or 
wilfully  travestied  than  the  doctrine  of  Immortality. 
The  popular  idea,  in  spite  of  a hundred  protests,  is 
that  Eternal  Life  is  to  live  for  ever.  A single  glance 
at  the  locus  classicus,  might  have  made  this  error 
impossible.  There  we  are  told  that  Life  Eternal  is 
not  to  live.  This  is  Life  Eternal — to  know.  And  yet 
— and  it  is  a notorious  instance  of  the  fact  that  men 
who  are  opposed  to  Religion  will  take  their  con- 
ceptions of  its  profoundest  truths  from  mere  vulgar 
perversions — this  view  still  represents  to  many  cul- 
tivated men  the  Scriptural  doctrine  of  Eternal  Life. 
From  time  to  time  the  taunt  is  thrown  at  Religion, 
not  unseldom  from  lips  which  Science  ought  to 
have  taught  more  caution,  that  the  Future  Life  of 
Christianity  is  simply  a prolonged  existence,  an 
eternal  monotony,  a blind  and  indefinite  continuance 
of  being.  The  Bible  never  could  commit  itself  to 
any  such  empty  platitude ; nor  could  Christianity 
ever  offer  to  the  world  a hope  so  colouiless.  Not 
that  Eternal  Life  has  nothing  to  do  with  everlasting- 
ness. That  is  part  of  the  conception  And  it  is  this 


ETERNAL  LIFE. 


2!7 


aspect  of  the  question  that  first  arrests  us  in  the  field 
of  Science.  But  even  Science  has  more  in  its  defi- 
nition  than  longevity.  It  has  a correspondence  and 
311  Environment ; and  although  it  cannot  fill  up 
these  terms  for  Religion,  it  can  indicate  at  least  the 
nature  of  the  relation,  the  kind  of  thing  that  is  meant 
by  Life.  Science  speaks  to  us  indeed  of  much  more 
than  numbers  of  years.  It  defines  degrees  of  Life. 
It  explains  a widening  Environment.  It  unfolds 
the  relation  between  a widening  Environment  and 
increasing  complexity  in  organisms.  And  if  it  has  no 
absolute  contribution  to  the  content  of  Religion,  its 
analogies  are  not  limited  to  a point.  It  yields  to 
Immortality,  and  this  is  the  most  that  Science  can 
do  in  any  case,  the  broad  framework  for  a doctrine. 

The  further  definition,  moreover,  of  this  corre- 
spondence as  knowing  is  in  the  highest  degree  signi- 
ficant. Is  not  this  the  precise  quality  in  an  Eternal 
correspondence  which  the  analogies  of  Science  would 
prepare  us  to  look  for  ? Longevity  is  associated 
with  complexity.  And  complexity  in  organisms  is 
manifested  by  the  successive  addition  of  correspon- 
dences, each  richer  and  larger  than  those  which  have 
gor.e  before.  The  differentiation,  therefore,  of  the 
spiritual  organism  ought  to  be  signalized  by  the 
addition  of  the  highest  possible  correspondence.  It 
is  not  essential  to  the  idea  that  the  correspondence 


ETERNAL  LIFE. 


ti8 

•jhould  be  altogether  novel ; it  is  necessary  rathei 
that  it  should  not.  An  altogether  new  correspon* 
dence  appearing  suddenly  without  shadow  or  pro^ 
phecy  would  be  a violation  of  continuity.  What  wh 
should  expect  would  be  something  new,  and  yet 
something  that  we  were  already  prepared  for.  We 
should  look  for  a further  development  in  harmony 
with  current  developments  ; the  extension  of  the  last 
and  highest  correspondence  in  a new  and  higher 
direction.  And  this  is  exactly  what  we  have.  In 
the  world  with  which  biology  deals,  Evolution  cul- 
minates in  Knowledge, 

At  whatever  point  in  the  zoological  scale  this  cor- 
respondence, or  set  of  correspondences,  begins,  it  is 
certain  there  is  nothing  higher.  In  its  stunted 
infancy  merely,  when  we  meet  with  its  rudest  be- 
ginnings in  animal  intelligence,  it  is  a thing  so  won- 
derful, as  to  strike  every  thoughtful  and  reverent 
observer  with  awe.  Even  among  the  invertebrates 
so  marvellously  are  these  or  kindred  powers  dis- 
played, that  naturalists  do  not  hesitate  now,  on  the 
ground  of  intelligence  at  least,  to  classify  some  of  the 
humblest  creatures  next  to  man  himself.^  Nothing 
in  nature,  indeed,  is  so  unlike  the  rest  of  nature,  so 
prophetic  of  what  is  beyond  it,  so  supernatural.  And 

' Sir  John  Lubbocks  Ants.  Bees,  and  Wasps,”  pp,  i 


ETERNAL  LIFE. 


21% 

as  manifested  in  Man  who  crowns  creation  with  his 
all-embracing  consciousness,  there  is  but  one  word 
to  describe  his  knowledge  : it  is  Diviri  If  then 
from  this  point  there  is  to  be  any  further  Evolution, 
this  surely  must  be  the  correspondence  in  which  it 
shall  take  place  ? This  correspondence  is  great 
enough  to  demand  development ; and  yet  it  is  little 
enough  to  need  it  The  magnificence  of  what  it  has 
achieved  relatively,  is  the  pledge  of  the  possibility 
of  more ; the  insignificance  of  its  conquest  absolute- 
ly involves  the  probability  of  still  richer  triumphs. 
If  anything,  in  short,  in  humanity  is  to  go  on  it 
must  be  this.  Other  correspondences  may  continue 
likewise ; others,  again,  we  can  well  afford  to  leave 
behind.  But  this  cannot  cease.  This  correspon- 
dence— or  this  set  of  correspondences,  for  it  is  very 
complex — is  it  not  that  to  which  men  with  one 
consent  would  attach  Eternal  Life  } Is  there  any- 
thing else  to  which  they  would  attach  it  ? Is  any- 
thing better  conceivable,  anything  worthier,  fuller, 
nobler,  anything  which  would  represent  a higher  form 
of  Evolution  or  offer  a more  perfect  ideal  for  an 
Eternal  Life  ? 

But  these  are  questions  of  quality ; and  the 
moment  we  pass  from  quantity  to  quality  we  leave 
Science  behind.  In  the  vocabulary  of  Science, 
Eternity  is  only  the  fraction  of  a word.  It  means 


Z20 


ETERNAL  LIFE, 


inere  everlastingness.  To  Religion,  on  the  other 
hand,  Eternity  has  little  to  do  with  time.  To 
correspond  with  the  God  of  Science,  the  Eternal 
Unknowable,  would  be  everlasting  existence ; to 
correspond  with  “the  true  God  and  Jesus  Christ/’ 
is  Eternal  Life.  The  quality  of  the  Eternal  Life 
alone  makes  the  heaven ; mere  everlastingness 
might  be  no  boon.  Even  the  brief  span  of  the 
temporal  life  is  too  long  for  those  who  spend  its 
years  in  sorrow.  Time  itself,  let  alone  Eternity, 
is  all  but  excruciating  to  Doubt.  And  many  be- 
sides Schopenhauer  have  secretly  regarded  con- 
sciousness as  the  hideous  mistake  and  malady  of 
Nature.  Therefore  we  must  not  only  have  quantity 
of  years,  to  speak  in  the  language  of  the  present, 
but  quality  of  correspondence.  When  we  leave 
Science  behind,  this  correspondence  also  receives 
a higher  name.  It  becomes  communion.  Other 

o 

names  there  are  for  it,  religious  and  theological. 
It  maybe  included  in  a general  expression.  Faith; 
or  we  may  call  it  by  a personal  and  specific  term. 
Love.  For  the  knowing  of  a Whole  so  great  in- 
volves the  co-operation  of  many  parts. 

Communion  with  God — can  it  be  demonstrated 
in  terms  of  Science  that  this  is  a correspondence 
which  will  never  break  ? We  do  not  appeal  to 
Science  for  such  a testimony.  We  have  asked  fo/ 


ETERNAL  LIFE. 


221 


its  conception  of  an  Eternal  Life  ; and  we  have 
received  for  answer  that  Eternal  Life  would  consist 
in  a correspondence  which  should  never  cease,  with 
an  Environment  which  should  never  pass  away. 
And  yet  what  would  Science  demand  of  a perfect 
correspondence  that  is  not  met  by  this,  the  knowing 
of  Godf  There  is  no  other  correspondence  which 
could  satisfy  one  at  least  of  the  conditions.  Not 
one  could  be  named  which  would  not  bear  on  the 
face  of  it  the  mark  and  pledge  of  its  mortality. 
But  this,  to  know  God,  stands  alone.  To  know 
God,  to  be  linked  with  God,  to  be  linked  with 
Eternity — if  this  is  not  the  ‘‘eternal  existence”  of 
biology,  what  can  more  nearly  approach  it  } And 
yet  we  are  still  a great  way  off — to  establish  a 
communication  with  the  Eternal  is  not  to  secure 
Eternal  Life.  It  must  be  assumed  that  the  com- 
munication could  be  sustained.  And  to  assume 
this  would  be  to  beg  the  question.  So  that  we 
have  still  to  prove  Eternal  Life.  But  let  it  be 
again  repeated,  we  are  not  here  seeking  proofs. 
We  are  seeking  light.  We  are  merely  reconnoitring 
from  the  furthest  promontory  of  Science  if  so  be 
that  through  the  haze  we  may  discern  the  outline 
of  a distant  coast  and  come  to  some  conclusion  as 
to  the  possibility  of  landing. 

But,  it  may  te  replied,  it  is  net  open  to  any  one 


222 


ETERNAL  LIFE. 


handling  the  question  of  Immortality  from  the  side 
of  Science  to  remain  neutral  as  to  the  question  of 
fact  It  is  not  enough  to  announce  that  he  has 
no  addition  to  make  to  the  positive  argument 
This  may  be  permitted  with  reference  to  othet 
points  of  contact  between  Science  and  Religion 
but  not  with  this.  We  are  told  this  question  ia 
settled — that  there  is  no  positive  side.  Science 
meets  the  entire  conception  ' of  Immortality  with  a 
direct  negative.  In  the  face  of  a powerful  consensus 
against  even  the  possibility  of  a Future  Life,  to 
content  oneself  with  saying  that  Science  pretended 
to  no  argument  in  favour  of  it  would  be  at  once 
impertinent  and  dishonest.  We  must  therefore 
devote  ourselves  for  a moment  to  the  question  of 
possibility. 

The  problem  is,  with  a material  body  and  a 
mental  organization  inseparably  connected  with  it, 
to  bridge  the  grave.  Emotion,  volition,  thought 
itself,  are  functions  of  the  brain.  When  the  brain 
is  impaired,  they  are  impaired.  When  the  brain  is 
not,  they  are  not.  Everything  ceases  with  the 
dissolution  of  the  material  fabric  ; muscular  activity 
and  mental  activity  perish  alike.  With  the  pro- 
nounced positive  statements  on  this  point  from 
many  departments  of  modern  Science  we  are  all 
familiar.  The  fatal  verdict  is  recorded  by  a hundred 


ETERNAL  LIFE, 


223 


hands  and  with  scarcely  a shadow  of  qualification. 
“ Unprejudiced  philosophy  is  compelled  t > reject 
the  idea  of  an  individual  immortality  and  of  a 
personal  continuance  after  death.  With  the  decay 
and  dissolution  of  its  material  substratum,  through 
which  alone  it  has  acquired  a conscious  existence 
and  become  a person,  and  upon  which  it  was 
dependent,  the  spirit  must  cease  to  exist.*'  ^ To  the 
same  effect  Vogt : ‘‘  Physiology  decides  definitely 
and  categorically  against  individual  immortality,  as 
against  any  special  existence  of  the  soul.  The  soul 
does  not  enter  the  foetus  like  the  evil  spirit  into 
persons  possessed,  but  is  a product  of  the  develop- 
ment of  the  brain,  just  as  muscular  activity  is  a 
product  of  muscular  development,  and  secretion  a 
product  of  glandular  development.”  After  a careful 
review  of  the  position  of  recent  Science  with  regard 
to  the  whole  doctrine,  Mr.  Graham  sums  up  thus: 
Such  is  the  argument  of  Science,  seemingly 
decisive  against  a future  life.  As  we  listen  to  her 
array  of  syllogisms,  our  hearts  die  within  us.  The 
hopes  of  men,  placed  in  one  scale  to  be  weighed, 
seem  to  fly  up  against  the  massive  weight  of  her 
evidence,  placed  in  the  other.  It  seems  as  if  all 
our  arguments  were  vain  and  unsubstantial,  as  ii 


' Biichnc-r  : “ Force  and  Matter/^  3rd  Ed.,  p.  233. 


224 


ETERNAL  LIFE. 


our  future  expectations  were  the  foolish  dreams  oi 
children,  as  if  there  could  not  be  any  other  possible 
verdict  arrived  at  upon  the  evidence  brought  for 
ward.”  1 

Can  we  go  on  in  the  teeth  of  so  real  an  obstruc* 
tion  ? Has  not  our  own  weapon  turned  against  us, 
Science  abolishing  with  authoritative  hand  the  very 
truth  we  are  asking  it  to  define? 

What  the  philosopher  has  to  throw  into  the  other 
scale  can  be  easily  indicated.  Generally  speaking, 
he  demurs  to  the  dogmatism  of  the  conclusion. 
That  mind  and  brain  react,  that  the  mental  and 
the  physiological  processes  are  related,  and  very 
intimately  related,  is  beyond  controversy.  But  how 
they  are  related,  he  submits,  it  still  altogether  un- 
known. The  correlation  of  mind  and  brain  do  not 
involve  their  identity.  And  not  a few  authorities 
accordingly  have  consistently  hesitated  to  draw  any 
conclusion  at  all.  Even  Buchner’s  statement  turns 
out,  on  close  examination,  to  be  tentative  in  the 
extreme.  In  prefacing  his  chapter  on  Personal 
Continuance,  after  a single  sentence  on  the  de- 
pendence of  the  soul  and  its  manifestations  upon 
a material  substratum,  he  remarks,  “ Though  we  are 
unable  to  form  a definite  idea  as  to  the  how  of  this 


‘ •*The  Creed  of  Science, p.  169. 


ETERNAL  LIFE. 


225 


connection,  we  are  still  by  these  facts  justified  in 
Asserting,  that  the  mode  of  this  connection  renders 
it  apparently  impossible  that  they  should  continue 
tc  exist  separately.”  ^ There  is,  therefore,  a flaw  at 
this  point  in  the  argument  for  materialism.  It 
may  not  help  the  spiritualist  in  the  least  degree 
positively.  He  may  be  as  far  as  ever  from  a 
theory  of  how  consciousness  could  continue  with- 
out the  material  tissue.  But  his  contention  secures 
for  him  the  right  of  speculation.  The  path  beyond 
may  lie  in  hopeless  gloom ; but  it  is  not  barred. 
He  may  bring  forward  his  theory  if  he  will.  And 
this  is  something.  For  a permission  to  go  on  is 
often  the  most  that  Science  can  grant  to  Religion. 

Men  have  taken  advantage  of  this  loophole  in 
various  ways.  And  though  it  cannot  be  . said  that 
these  speculations  offer  us  more  than  a proba- 
bility, this  is  still  enough  to  combine  with  the 
deep-seated  expectation  in  the  bosom  of  mankind 
and  give  fresh  lustre  to  the  hope  of  a future 
life.  Whether  we  find  relief  in  the  theory  of  a 
simple  dualism ; whether  with  Ulrici  we  further 
define  the  soul  as  an  invisible  enswathement  of  the 
body,  material  yet  non-atomic  ; whether,  with  the 
'‘Unseen  Universe,^’  we  are  helped  by  the  spectacle 


» “Force  and  Matter,”  p.  231. 


Q 


226 


ETERNAL  LIFE. 


of  known  forms  of  matter  shading  off  into  an 
ever-growing  subtilty,  mobility,  and  immateriality: 
or  whether,  with  Wundt,  we  regard  the  soul  aii 
the  ordered  unity  of  many  elements,*’  it  is  cer> 
tain  that  shapes  can  be  given  to  the  conception 
of  a correspondence  which  shall  bridge  the  grave 
such  as  to  satisfy  minds  too  much  accustomed  to 
weigh  evidence  to  put  themselves  off  with  fancies. 

But  whether  the  possibilities  of  physiology  or  the 
theories  of  philosophy  do  or  do  not  substantially 
assist  us  in  realizing  Immortality,  is  to  Religion,  to 
Religion  at  least  regarded  from  the  present  point  of 
view,  of  inferior  moment.  The  fact  of  Immortality 
rests  for  us  on  a different  basis.  Probably,  indeed, 
after  all  the  Christian  philosopher  never  engaged  him- 
self in  a more  superfluous  task  than  in  seeking  along 
physiological  lines  to  find  room  for  a soul.  The 
theory  of  Christianity  has  only  to  be  fairly  stated  to 
make  manifest  its  thorough  independence  of  all  the 
usual  speculations  on  Immortality.  The  theory  is 
not  that  thought,  volition,  or  emotion,  as  such  are 
to  survive  the  grave.  The  difficulty  of  holding  a 
doctrine  in  this  form,  in  spite  of  what  has  been 
advanced  to  the  contrary,  in  spite  of  the  hopes  and 
wishes  of  mankind,  in  spite  of  all  the  scientific  and 
philosophical  attempts  to  make  it  tenable,  is  still 
profound.  No  secular  theory  of  personal  continu- 


ETERNAL  LIFE, 


227 


ance,  as  even  Butler  acknowledged,  does  not 
equally  demand  the  eternity  of  the  brute.  No 
secular  theory  defines  the  point  in  the  chain  of 
Evolution  at  which  organisms  became  endowed 
with  Immortality.  No  secular  theory  explains  the 
condition  of  the  endowment,  nor  indicates  its  goal. 
And  if  we  have  nothing  more  to  fan  hope  than 
the  unexplored  mystery  of  the  whole  region,  or  the 
unknown  remainders  among  the  potencies  of  Life, 
then,  as  those  who  have  hope  only  in  this  world,” 
we  are  ‘'of  all  men  the  most  miserable.” 

When  we  turn,  on  the  other  hand,  to  the  doc- 
trine as  it  came  from  the  lips  of  Christ,  we  find 
ourselves  in  an  entirely  different  region.  He  makes 
no  attempt  to  project  the  material  into  the  imma- 
terial. The  old  elements,  however  refined  and  subtil 
as  to  their  matter,  are  not  in  themselves  to  inherit 
the  Kingdom  of  God.  That  which  is  flesh  is  flesh. 
Instead  of  attaching  Immortality  to  the  natural 
organism.  He  introduces  a new  and  original  factor 
which  none  of  the  secular,  and  few  even  of  the 
theological  theories,  seem  to  take  sufficiently  into 
account  To  Christianity,  “ he  that  hath  the  Son  of 
God  hath  Life,  and  he  that  hath  not  the  Son  hath 
not  Life.”  This,  as  we  take  it,  defines  the  corre- 
spondence which  is  to  bridge  the  grave.  This  is  the 
clue  to  the  nature  of  the  Life  that  lies  at  the  back 


228 


ETERNAL  LIFE 


of  the  spiritual  organism.  And  this  is  the  true 
solution  of  the  mystery  of  Eternal  Life. 

There  lies  a something  at  the  back  of  the  corre^ 
spondences  of  the  spiritual  organism — just  as  there 
lies  a something  at  the  back  of  the  natural  corre- 
spondences. To  say  that  Life  is  a correspondence  is 
only  to  express  the  partial  truth.  There  is  some- 
thing behind.  Life  manifests  itself  in  correspon- 
dences. But  what  determines  them  ? The  organism 
exhibits  a variety  of  correspondences.  What  organ- 
izes them } As  in  the  natural,  so  in  the  spiritual, 
there  is  a Principle  of  Life.  We  cannot  get  rid  of 
that  term.  However  clumsy,  however  provisional, 
however  much  a mere  cloak  for  ignorance,  Science 
as  yet  is  unable  to  dispense  with  the  idea  of  a 
Principle  of  Life.  We  must  work  with  the  word 
till  we  get  a better.  Now  that  which  determines 
the  correspondence  of  the  spiritual  organism  is  a 
Principle  of  Spiritual  Life.  It  is  a new  and  Divine 
Possession.  He  that  hath  the  Son  hath  Life ; 
conversely,  he  that  hath  Life  hath  the  Son.  And 
this  indicates  at  once  the  quality  and  the  quantity 
of  the  correspondence  which  is  to  bridge  the  grave. 
He  that  hath  Life  hath  the  Son,  He  possesses  the 
Spirit  of  a Son.  That  spirit  is,  so  to  speak, 
organized  within  him  by  the  Son.  It  is  the  mani- 
festation of  the  new  nature — ^of  which  more  anon 


ETERNAL  LIFE. 


229 


The  fact  to  note  at  present  is  that  this  is  not  an 
organic  correspondence,  but  a spiritual  correspon- 
dence. It  comes  not  from  generation,  but  from 
regeneration.  The  relation  between  the  spiritual 
man  and  his  Environment  is,  in  theological  lan- 
guage, a filial  relation.  With  the  new  Spirit,  the 
filial  correspondence,  he  knows  the  Father — and 
this  is  Life  Eternal.  This  is  not  only  the  real 
relation,  but  the  only  possible  relation  : Neither 

knoweth  any  man  the  Father  save  the  Son,  and  he 
to  whomsoever  the  Son  will  reveal  Him.*’  And 
this  on  purely  natural  grounds.  It  takes^  the  Divine 
to  know  the  Divine — but  in  no  more  mysterious 
sense  than  it  takes  the  human  to  understand  the 
human.  The  analogy,  indeed,  for  the  whole  field 
here  has  been  finely  expressed  already  by  Paul : 
“What  man,”  he  asks,  “knoweth  the  things  of  a 
man,  save  the  spirit  of  man  which  is  in  him  ? 
even  so  the  things  of  God  knoweth  no  man,  but 
the  Spirit  of  God.  Now  we  have  received,  not  the 
spirit  of  the  world,  but  the  Spirit  which  is  of  God ; 
that  we  might  .know  the  things  that  are  freely 
giv^en  to  us  of  God.”  ^ 

It  were  idle,  such  being  the  quality  of  the  new 
lelation,  to  add  that  this  also  contains  the  guarantee 


I Cor.  ii.  II,  12. 


230 


ETERNAL  LIFE. 


of  its  eternity.  Here  at  last  is  a correspondence 
which  will  never  cease.  Its  powers  in  bridging  the 
grave  have  been  tried.  The  correspondence  of  the 
spiritual  man  possesses  the  supernatural  virtues  ol 
the  Resurrection  and  the  Life.  It  is  known  by 
former  experiment  to  have  survived  the  changes 
in  the  physical  state  of  the  environment,”  and  those 
mechanical  actions  ” and  “ variations  of  available 
food,”  which  Mr.  Herbert  Spencer  tells  us  are  “liable 
to  stop  the  processes  going  on  in  the  organism.”  In 
short,  this  is  a correspondence  which  at  once  satisfies 
the  demands  of  Science  and  Religion.  In  mere 
quantity  it  is  different  from  every  other  corre- 
spondence known.  Setting  aside  everything  else  in 
Religion,  everything  adventitious,  local,  and  pro- 
visional ; dissecting  in  to  the  bone  and  marrow  we 
find  this — a correspondence  which  can  never  break 
with  ar  Environment  which  can  never  change. 
Here  is  a relation  established  with  Eternity.  The 
passing  years  lay  no  limiting  hand  on  it.  CoF' 
ruption  injures  it  not.  It  survives  Death.  It,  and 
it  only,  will  stretch  beyond  the  grave  and  be  found 
inviolate — 

*‘When  the  moon  is  old, 

And  the  stars  are  cold. 

And  the  books  of  the  Judgment-day  unfold.* 

The  misgiving  which  will  creep  sometimes  over  the 


ETERNAL  LIFE. 


23? 


brightest  faith  has  already  received  its  expression 
and  its  rebuke  : “Who  shall  separate  us  from  the 
love  of  Christ  ? Shall  tribulation,  or  distress,  or 
persecution,  or  famine,  or  nakedness,  or  peril,  ,of 
sword?'’  Shall  these  “changes  in  the  physical  state 
of  the  environment”  which  threaten  death  to  the 
natural  man  destroy  the  spiritual  ? Shall  death,  or 
life,  or  angels,  or  principalities,  or  powers,  arrest 
or  tamper  with  his  eternal  correspondences?  “Nay, 
in  all  these  things  we  are  more  than  conquerors 
through  Him  that  loved  us.  For  I am  persuaded 
that  neither  death,  nor  life,  nor  angels,  nor  principali- 
ties, nor  powers,  nor  things  present,  nor  things  to 
come,  nor  height,  nor  depth,  nor  any  other  creature, 
shall  be  able  to  separate  us  from  the  love  of  God, 
which  is  in  Christ  Jesus  our  Lord.”  ^ 

It  may  seem  an  objection  to  some  that  the  “ per- 
fect correspondence  ” should  come  to  man  in  so 
extraordinary  a way.  The  earlier  stages  in  the 
doctrine  are  promising  enough  ; they  are  entirely  in 
fine  with  Nature.  And  if  Nature  had  also  furnished 
the  “ perfect  correspondence  ” demanded  for  an 
Eternal  Life  the  position  might  be  unassailable. 
But  this  sudden  reference  to  a something  outside  the 
natural  Environment  destroys  the  continuity^  and 


* Rom.  viii.  35-39. 


*32 


ETERNAL  LIFE. 


discovers  a permanent  weakness  in  the  whole  theory  ? 

To  which  there  is  a twofold  reply.  In  the  first 
place,  to  go  outside  what  we  call  Nature  is  not  to 
go  outside  Environment.  Nature,  the  natural  Envir-* 
onment,  is  only  a part  of  Environment.  There 
is  another  large  part  which,  though  some  profess 
to  have  no  correspondence  with  it,  is  not  on  that 
account  unreal,  or  even  unnatural  The  mental  and 
moral  world  is  unknown  to  the  plant.  But  it  is  real 
It  cannot  be  affirmed  either  that  it  is  unnatural  to 
the  plant ; although  it  might  be  said  that  from  the 
point  of  view  of  the  Vegetable  Kingdom  it  was 
supernatural.  Things  are  natural  or  supernatural 
simply  according  to  where  one  stands.  Man  is 
supernatural  to  the  mineral ; God  is  supernatural  to 
the  man.  When  a mineral  is  seized  upon  by  the 
living  plant  and  elevated  to  the  organic  kingdom, 
no  trespass  against  Nature  is  committed.  It  merely 
enters  a larger  Environment,  which  before  was  super- 
natural to  it,  but  which  now  is  entirely  natural 
When  the  heart  of  a man,  again,  is  seized  upon  by* 
the  quickening.  Spirit  of  God,  no  further  violence  is 
done  to  natural  law.  It  is  another  case  of  the  in* 
organic,  so  to  speak,  passing  into  the  organic. 

But,  in  the  second  place,  it  is  complained  as  if  it 
were  an  enormity  in  itself  that  the  spiritual  corre- 
spondence should  be  furnished  from  the  spiritual 


ETERNAL  LIFE. 


233 


world.  And  to  this  the  answer  lies  in  the  same 
direction.  Correspondence  in  any  case  is  the  gift  o< 
Environment.  The  natural  Environment  gives  men 
their  natural  faculties the  spiritual  affords  them 
their  spiritual  faculties.  It  is  natural  for  the  spiritual 
Environment  to  supply  the  spiritual  faculties ; it 
would  be  quite  unnatural  for  the  natural  Environ- 
ment to  do  it.  The  natural  law  of  Biogenesis  forbids 
it ; the  moral  fact  that  the  finite  cannot  comprehend 
the  Infinite  is  against  it ; the  spiritual  principle  that 
flesh  and  blood  cannot  inherit  the  kingdom  of  God 
renders  it  absurd.  Not,  however,  that  the  spiritual 
faculties  are,  as  it  were,  manufactured  in  the  spiritual 
world  and  supplied  ready-made  to  the  spiritual  organ- 
ism— forced  upon  it  as  an  external  equipment.  This 
certainly  is  not  involved  in  saying  that  the  spiritual 
faculties  are  furnished  by  the  spiritual  world.  Or- 
ganisms are  not  added  to  by  accretion,  as  in  the  case 
of  minerals,  but  by  growth.  And  the  spiritual 
faculties  are  organized  in  the  spiritual  protoplasm  of 
the  soul,  just  as  other  faculties  are  organized  in  the 
protoplasm  of  the  body.  The  plant  is  made  of 
materials  which  have  once  been  inorganic.  An 
organizing  principle  not  belonging  to  their  kingdom 
lays  hold  of  them  and  elaborates  them  until  they 
have  correspondences  with  the  kingdom  to  which  the 
organizing  principle  belonged.  Their  original  organs 


ETERl^AL  LIFE. 


aj4 

izing  principle,  if  it  can  be  called  by  this  name, 
was  Crystallisation  ; so  that  we  have  now  a distinctly 
foreign  power  organizing  in  totally  new  and  higher 
directions.  In  the  spiritual ‘world,  similarly,  we  find 
an  organizing  principle  at  work  among  the  materials 
of  the  organic  kingdom,  performing  a further  mir- 
acle, but  not  a different  kind  of  miracle,  producing 
organizations  of  a novel  kind,  but  not  by  a novel 
method.  The  second  process,  in  fact,  is  simply  what 
an  enlightened  evolutionist  would  have  expected 
from  the  first.  It  marks  the  natural  and  legitimate 
progress  of  the  development.  And  this  in  the  line 
of  the  true  Evolution — not  the  linear  Evolution, 
which  would  look  for  the  development  of  the  natural 
man  through  powers  already  Inherent,  as  if  one  were 
to  look  to  Crystallisation  to  accomplish  the  develop- 
ment of  the  mineral  into  the  plant, — but  that  larger 
form  of  Evolution  which  includes  among  its  factors 
the  double  Law  of  Biogenesis  and  the  immense 
further  truth  that  this  involves. 

What  is  further  included  in  this  complex  corre- 
spondence we  shall  have  opportunity  to  illustrate 
afterwards.^  Meantime  let  it  be  noted  on  what  the 
Christian  argument  for  Immortality  really  rests.  It 
stands  upon  the  pedestal  on  which  the  theologian 


^ Vide  Conformity  to  Type,"  page  287, 


ETERNAL  LIFE. 


235 


rests  the  whole  of  historical  Christianity — the  Resur- 
rection of  Jesus  Christ. 

It  ought  to  be  placed  in  the  forefront  of  all  Chris- 
tian teaching  that  Christ’s  mission  on  earth  was  to 
give  men  Life.  “ I am  come  He  said,  “that  ye 
might  have  Life,  and  that  yo  might  have  it  more 
abundantly.”  And  that  He  meant  literal  Life,  literal 
spiritual  and  Eternal  Life,  is  clear  from  the  whole 
course  of  His  teaching  and  acting.  To  impose  a 
metaphorical  meaning  on  the  commonest  word  of  the 
New  Testament  is  to  violate  every  canon  of  interpre- 
tation, and  at  the  same  time  to  charge  the  greatest 
of  teachers  with  persistently  mystifying  His  hearers 
by  an  unusual  use  of  so  exact  a vehicle  for  express- 
ing definite  thought  as  the  Greek  language,  and  that 
on  the  most  momentous  subject  of  which  He  ever 
spoke  to  men.  It  is  a canon  of  interpretation,  ac- 
cording to  Alford,  that  “ a figurative  sense  of  words 
is  never  admissible  except  when  required  by  the 
context”  The  context,  in  most  cases,  is  not  only 
directly  unfavourable  to  a figurative  meaning,  but  in 
innumerable  instances  in  Christ’s  teaching  Life  is 
broadly  contrasted  with  Death.  In  the  teaching  of 
the  apostles,  again,  we  find  that,  without  exception, 
they  accepted  the  term  in  it«  simple  literal  sense. 
Reuss  defines  the  apostolic  belief  with  his  usual  im- 
partiality when — and  the  quotation  is  doubly  perti« 


#36 


ETERNAL  LIFE. 


nent  here — he  discovers  in  the  apostle’s  conception 
of  Life,  first,  the  idea  of  a real  existence,  an  exis* 
tence  such  as  is  proper  to  God  and  to  the  Word  ; an 
imperishable  existence — that  is  to  say,  not  subject  to 
the  vicissitudes  and  imperfections  of  the  finite  world. 
This  primary  idea  is  repeatedly  expressed,  at  least 
in  a negative  form  ; it  leads  to  a doctrine  of  immor- 
tality, or,  to  speak  more  correctly,  of  life,  far  surpass- 
ing any  that  had  been  expressed  in  the  formulas  of 
the  current  philosophy  or  theology,  and  resting  upon 
premises  and  conceptions  altogether  different.  In 
fact,  it  can  dispense  both  with  the  philosophical 
thesis  of  the  immateriality  or  indestructibility  of  the 
human  soul,  and  with  the  theological  thesis  of  a 
miraculous  corporeal  reconstruction  of  our  person  ; 
theses,  the  first  of  which  is  altogether  foreign  to  the 
religion  of  the  Bible,  and  the  second  absolutely 
opposed  to  reason.”  Second,  ‘‘  the  idea  of  life,  as  it 
is  conceived  in  this  system,  implies  the  idea  of  a 
power,  an  operation,  a communication,  since  this  life 
no  longer  remains,  so  to  speak,  latent  or  passive  in 
God  and  in  the  Word,  but  through  them  reaches  the 
believer.  It  is  not  a mental  somnolent  thing ; it  is 
not  a plant  without  fruit ; it  is  a germ  which  is  to 
find  fullest  development.”  ^ 

* ^ History  of  Christian  Theology  in  the  Apostolic  Age,”  vol 
ii.  p.  496. 


ETERNAL  LIFE. 


237 


If  we  are  asked  to  define  more  clearly  what  is 
meant  by  tins  mysterious  endowment  of  Life,  we 
again  hand  over  the  difficulty  to  Science.  When 
Science  can  define  the  Natural  Life  and  the  Physical 
Force  we  may  hope  for  further  clearness  on  the 
nature  and  action  of  the  Spiritual  Powers.  The 
effort  to  detect  the  living  Spirit  must  be  at  least  as 
idle  as  the  attempt  to  subject  protoplasm  to  micro- 
scopic examination  in  the  hope  of  discovering  Life. 
We  are  warned,  also,  not  to  expect  too  much. 
“Thou  canst  not  tell  whence  it  cometh  or  whither  it 
goeth.*'  This  being  its  quality,  when  the  Spiritual 
Life  is  discovered  in  the  laboratory  it  will  possibly 
be  time  to  give  it  up  altogether.  It  may  say,  as 
Socrates  of  his  soul,  “ You  may  bury  me — if  you  can 
catch  me.” 

Science  never  corroborates  a spiritual  truth  with- 
out illuminating  it.  The  threshold  of  Eternity  is  a 
place  where  many  shadows  meet.  And  the  light  of 
Science  here,  where  everything  is  so  dark,  is  welcome 
a thousand  times.  Many  men  would  be  religious  if 
they  knew  where  to  begin ; many  would  be  more 
religious  if  they  were  sure  where  it  would  end.  It 
is  not  indifference  that  keeps  some  men  from  God, 
but  ignorance.  “ Good  Master,  what  must  I do  to 
inherit  Eternal  Life  } ” is  still  the  deepest  question 
of  the  age.  What  is  Religion  ? What  am  I to  be- 


238 


ETERNAL  LIFE. 


lieve  ? What  seek  with  all  my  heart  and  soul  and 
mind  ? — this  is  the  imperious  question  sent  up  to 
consciousness  from  the  depths  of  being  in  all  earnest 
hours  ; sent  down  again,  alas,  with  many  of  us,  time 
after  time,  unanswered.  Into  all  our  thought  and 
work  and  reading  this  question  pursues  us.  But  the 
theories  are  rejected  one  by  one  ; the  great  books  are 
returned  sadly  to  their  shelves,  the  years  pass,  and 
the  problem  remains  unsolved.  The  confusion  of 
tongues  here  is  terrible;  Every  day  a new  authority 
announces  himself.  Poets,  philosophers,  preachers 
try  their  hand  on  us  in  turn.  New  prophets  arise, 
and  beseech  us  for  our  soul’s  sake  to  give  ear  to 
them — at  last  in  an  hour  of  inspiration  they  have 
discovered  the  final  truth.  Yet  the  doctrine  of  yes- 
terday is  challenged  by  a fresh  philosophy  to-day  : 
and  the  creed  of  to-day  will  fall  in  turn  before  the 
criticism  of  to-morrow.  Increase  of  knowledge  in- 
creaseth  sorrow.  And  at  length  the  conflicting  truths, 
like  the  beams  of  light  in  the  laboratory  experiment, 
combine  in  the  mind  to  make  total  darkness. 

But  here  are  two  outstanding  authorities  agreed— 
not  men,  not  philosophers,  not  creeds.  Here  is  the 
voice  of  God  and  the  voice  of  Nature.  I cannot  be 
wrong  if  I listen  to  them.  Sometimes  when  uncer* 
tain  of  a voice  from  its  very  loudness,  we  catch  the 
missing  syllable  in  the  echo.  In  God  and  Nature  we 


ETERNAL  LIFE. 


239 


have  Voice  and  Echo.  When  I hear  both,  I ara 
assured.  My  sense  of  hearing  does  not  betray  me 
twice.  I recognise  the  Voice  in  the  Echo,  the  Echo 
makes  me  certain  of  the  Voice  ; I listen  and  I know. 
The  question  of  a Future  Life  is  a biological  ques- 
tion. Nature  may  be  silent  on  other  problems  of 
Religion  ; but  here  she  has  a right  to  speak.  The 
whole  confusion  around  the  doctrine  of  Eternal  Life 
has  arisen  from  making  it  a question  of  Philosophy. 
We  shall  do  ill  to  refuse  a hearing  to  any  speculation 
of  Philosophy ; the  ethical  relations  here  especially 
are  intimate  and  real.  But  in  the  first  instance 
Eternal  Life,  as  a question  of  Life^  is  a problem  for 
Biology.  The  soul  is  a living  organism.  And  for 
any  question  as  to  the  soul’s  Life  we  must  appeal  to 
Life-science.  And  what  does  the  Life-science  teach  ? 
That  if  I am  to  inherit  Eternal  Life,  I must  cultivate 
a correspondence  with  the  Eternal.  This  is  a simple 
proposition,  for  Nature  is  always  simple.  I take 
this  proposition,  and,  leaving  Nature,  proceed  to  fill 
it  in.  I search  everywhere  for  a clue  to  the  Eternal. 
I ransack  literature  for  a definition  of  a correspond- 
ence between  man  and  God.  Obviously  that  can 
only  come  from  one  source.  And  the  analogies  of 
Science  permit  us  to  apply  to  it.  All  knowledge  lies 
in  Environment.  When  I want  to  know  about  min- 
erals I go  to  minerals.  When  I want  to  know  about 


240 


ETERNAL  LIFE. 


flowers  I go  to  flowers.  And  they  tell  me.  In  theii 
own  way  they  speak  to  pie,  each  in  its  own  way,  and 
each  for  itself — not  the  mineral  for  the  flower,  vvhicli 
is  impossible,  nor  the  flower  for  the  mineral,  which  is 
also  impossible.  So  if  I want  to  know  about  Man, 
I go  to  his  part  of  the  Environment.  And  he  tells 
me  about  himself,  not  as  the  plant  or  the  mineral,  for 
he  is  neither,  but  in  his  own  way.  And  if  I want  to 
know  about  God,  I go  to  His  part  of  the  Environ- 
ment. And  He  tells  me  about  Himself,  not  as  a 
Man,  for  He  is  not  Man,  but  in  His  own  way.  And 
just  as  naturally  as  the  flpwer  and  the  mineral  and 
the  Man,  each  in  their  own  way,  tell  me  about  them- 
selves, He  tells  me  about  Himself.  He  very  strangely 
condescends  indeed  in  making  things  plain  to  me, 
actually  assuming  for  a time  the  Form  of  a Man  that 
I at  my  poor  level  may  better  see  Him.  This  is  my 
opportunity  to  know  Him.  This  incarnation  is  God 
making  Himself  accessible  to  human  thought — God 
opening  to  man  the  possibility  of  correspondence 
through  Jesus  Christ.  And  this  correspondence  and 
this  Environment  are  those  I seek.  He  Himself 
assures  me,  “ This  is  Life  Eternal,  that  they  might 
know  Thee,  the  only  true  God,  and  Jesus  Christ  whom 
Thou  hast  sent.”  Do  I not  now  discern  the  deeper 
meaning  in  ''Jesus  Christ  whom  Thou  hast  sent  ” ? 
Do  1 not  better  understand  with  what  vision  and 


ETERNAL  LIFE. 


241 


rapture  the  profoundest  of  the  disciples  exclaims, 
^ The  Son  of  God  is  come,  and  hath  given  us  an 
understanding  that  we  might  know  Him  that  is 
Tlue^?l 

Having  opened  correspondence  with  the  Eternal 
Environment,  the  subsequent  stages  are  in  the  line  of 
all  other  normal  development.  We  have  but  to  con- 
tinue, to  deepen,  to  extend,  and  to  enrich  the  corre- 
spondence that  has  been  begun.  And  we  shall  soon 
find  to  our  surprise  that  this  is  accompanied  by 
another  and  parallel  process.  The  action  is  not  all 
upon  our  side.  The  Environment  also  will  be  found 
to  correspond.  The  influence  of  Environment  is  one 
of  the  greatest  and  most  substantial  of  modern  bio- 
logical doctrines.  Of  the  power  of  Environment  to 
form  or  transform  organisms,  of  its  ability  to  develop 
or  suppress  function,  of  its  potency  in  determining 
growth,  and  generally  of  its  immense  influence  in 
Evolution,  there  is  no  need  now  to  speak.  But  En- 
vironment is  how  acknowledged  to  be  one  of  the 
most  potent  factors  in  the  Evolution  of  Life.  The 
• influence  of  Environment  too  seems  to  increase  rather 
than  diminish  as  we  approach  the  higher  forms  of 
being.  The  highest  forms  are  the  most  mobile  ; their 
capacity  .:>f  change  is  the  greatest ; they  are,  in  short, 


* I John  V,  2a 


ETERNAL  LIFE. 


242 

most  easily  acted  on  by  Environment  And  not  only 
are  the  highest  organisms  the  most  mobile,  but  the 
highest  parts  of  the  highest  organisms  are  more 
mobile  than  the  lower.  Environment  can  do  littl^ 
comparatively,  in  the  direction  of  inducing  variation 
in  the  body  of  a child  ; but  how  plastic  is  its  mind  ! 
How  infinitely  sensitive  is  its  soul ! How  infallibly 
can  it  be  tuned  to  music  or  to  dissonance  by  the 
moral  harmony  or  discord  of  its  outward  lot ! How 
decisively  indeed  are  we  not  all  formed  and  moulded, 
made  or  unmade,  by  external  circumstance ! Might 
we  not  all  confess  with  Ulysses, — 

^ I am  a part  of  all  that  I have  met  ” ? 

Much  more,  then,  shall  we  look  for  the  influence  of 
Environment  on  the  spiritual  nature  of  him  who  has 
opened  correspondence  with  God.  Reaching  out  his 
eager  and  quickened  faculties  to  the  spiritual  world 
around  him,  shall  he  not  become  spiritual  ? In  vital 
contact  with  Holiness,  shall  he  not  become  holy? 
Breathing  now  an  atmosphere  of  ineffable  Purity, 
shall  he  miss  becoming  pure?  Walking  with  God* 
from  day  to  day,  shall  he  fail  to  be  taught  of  God  ? 

Growth  in  grace  is  sometimes  described  as  a 
strange,  mystical,  and  unintelligible  process.  It  is 
mystical,  but  neither  strange  nor  unintelligible.  It 
proceeds  according  to  Natural  Law,  and  the  leading 


ETERNAL  LIFE. 


243 


factor  in  sanctification  is  Influence  of  Environment 
The  possibility  of  it  depends  upon  the  mobility  of 
the  organism;  the  result,  on  the  extent  and  frequency 
of  certain  correspondences.  These  facts  insensibly 
lead  on  to  a further  suggestion.  Is  it  not  possible 
that  these  biological  truths  may  carry  with  them  the 
clue  to  a still  profounder  philosophy — even  that  o< 
Regeneration  ? 

Evolutionists  tell  us  that  by  the  influence  of  en- 
vironment certain  aquatic  animals,  have  become 
adapted  to  a terrestrial  mode  of  life.  Breathing 
normally  by  gills,  as  the  result  and  reward  of  a 
continued  effort  carried  on  from  generation  to  gener- 
ation to  inspire  the  air  of  heaven  direct,  they  have 
slowly  acquired  the  lung-function.  In  the  young 
organism,  true  to  the  ancestral  type,  the  gill  still 
persists — as  in  the  tadpole  of  the  common  frog 
But  as  maturity  approaches  the  true  lung  appears  ; 
the  gill  gradually  transfers  its  task  to  the  higher 
’"organ.  It  then  becomes  atrophied  and  disappears, 
and  finally  respiration  in  the  adult  is  conducted  by 
lungs  alone.^  We  may  be  far,  in  the  meantime,  from 
saying  that  this  is  proved.  It  is  for  those  who  acce])t 
it  to  deny  the  justice  of  the  spiritual  analogy.  Is 

^ also  the  remarkable  experiments  of  Fraulein  v.  Chauvin 
on  the  Transformation  of  the  Mexican  Axolotl  into  Amblystoma. 
— -Weismann’s  “ Studies  in  the  Theory  of  Descent,"  vol.  ii.  pt.  iii 


244 


ETERNAL  LIFE, 


religion  to  them  unscientific  in  its  doctrine  of  Re- 
generation ? Will  the  evolutionist  who  admits  the 
regeneration  of  the  frog  under  the  modifying  influence 
of  a continued  correspondence  with  a new  environ- 
ment, care  to  question  the  possibility  of  the  soul 
acquiring  such  a faculty  as  that  of  Prayer,  the  mar- 
vellous breathing-function  of  the  new  creature,  when 
in  contact  with  the  atmosphere  of  a besetting  God  ? 
Is  the  change  from  the  earthly  to  the  heavenly  more 
mysterious  than  the  change  from  the  aquatic  to 
the  terrestrial  mode  of  life  ? Is  Evolution  to  stop 
with  the  organic?  If  it  be  objected  that  it  has  taken 
ages  to  perfect  the  function  in  the  batrachian,  the 
reply  is,  that  it  will  take  ages  to  perfect  the  function 
in  the  Christian.  For  every  thousand  years  the 
natural  evolution  will  allow  for  the  development  of 
its  organism,  the  Higher  Biology  will  grant  its 
product  millions.  We  have  indeed  spoken  of  the 
spiritual  correspondence  as  already  perfect — but  it 
is  perfect  only  as  the  bud  is  perfect.  *[lt  doth 
not  yet  appear  what  it  shall  be,'' any  more  than  it 
appeared  a million  years  ago  what  the  evolving 
batrachian  would  be. 

But  to  return.  We  have  been  dealing  with  the 
scientific  aspects  of  communion  with  God.  Insen- 
sibly, from  quantity  we  have  been  led  to  speak  of 
quality.  And  enough  has  now  been  advanced  to 


ETERNAL  LIFE, 


245 


indicate  generally  the  nature  of  that  correspondence 
with  which  is  necessarily  associated  Eternal  Life, 
There  remain  but  one  or  two  details  to  which  we 
must  lastly,  and  very  briefly,  address  ourselves. 

The  quality  of  everlastingness  belongs,  as  we  have 
seen,  to  a single  correspondence,  or  rather  to  a single 
set  of  correspondences.  But  it  is  apparent  that 
before  this  correspondence  can  take  full  and  final 
effect  a further  process  is  necessary.  By  some  means 
it  must  be  separated  from  all  the  other  correspon- 
dences of  the  organism  which  do  not  share  its 
peculiar  quality.  In  this  life  it  is  restrained  by  these 
other  correspondences.  They  may  contribute  to  it, 
or  hinder  it ; but  they  are  essentially  of  a different 
order.  .They  belong  not  to  Eternity  but  to  Time, 
and  to  this  present  world ; and,  unless  some  provision 
is  made  for  dealing  with  them,  they  will  detain  the 
aspiring  organism  in  this  present  world  till  Time  is 
ended.  Of  course,  in  a sense,  all  that  belongs  to 
Time  belongs  also  to  Eternity ; but  these  lower 
correspondences  are  in  their  nature  unfitted  for  an 
Eternal  Life.  Even  if  they  were  perfect  in  their 
relation  to  their  Environment,  they  would  still  not 
be  Eternal.  However  opposed,  apparently,  to  the 
scientific  definition  of  Eternal  Life,  it  is  yet  true 
that  perfect  correspondence  with  Environment  is  not 
Eternal  Life.  A very  important  word  in  the  com^ 


246 


ETERNAL  LIFE. 


plete  definition  is,  in  this  sentence,  omitted.  On 
that  word  it  has  not  been  necessary  hitherto,  and 
for  obvious  reasons,  to  place  any  emphasis,  but  when 
we  come  to  deal  with  false  pretenders  to  Immortality 
we  must  return  to  it.  Were  the  definition  complete 
as  it  stands,  it  might,  with  the  permission  of  the 
psycho-physiologist,  guarantee  the  Immortality  of 
every  living  thing.  In  the  dog,  for  instance,  the 
material  framework  giving  way  at  death  might  leave 
the  released  canine  spirit  still  free  to  inhabit  the 
old  Environment.  And  so  with  every  creature  which 
had  ever  established  a conscious  relation  with  sur- 
rounding things.  Now  the  difficulty  in  framing  a 
theory  of  Eternal  Life  has  been  to  construct  one 
which  will  exclude  the  brute  creation,  drawing  the 
line  rigidly  at  man,  or  at  least  somewhere  within 
the  human  race.  Not  that  we  need  object  to  the 
Immortality  of  the  dog,  or  of  the.  whole  inferior 
creation.  Nor  that  we  need  refuse  a place  to  any 
intelligible  speculation  which  would  people  the  earth 
to-day  with  the  invisible  forms  of  all  things  that 
have  ever  lived.  Only  we  still  insist  that  this  is 
not  Eternal  Life.  And  why } Because  their  En- 
vironment is  not  Eternal.  Their  correspondence, 
however  firmly  established,  is  established  with  that 
which  shall  pass  away.  An  Eternal  Life  demands 
an  Eternal  Environment 


ETERNAL  LIFE 


247 


The  demand  for  a perfect  Environment  as  well 
as  for  a perfect  correspondence  is  less  clear  in  Mr. 
Herbert  Spencer’s  definition  than  it  might  be.  But 
it  is  an  essential  factor.  An  organism  might  remain 
true  to  its  Environment,  but  what  if  the  Environ- 
ment played  it  false  } If  the  organism  possessed  the 
power  to  change,  it  could  adapt  itself  to  successive 
changes  in  the  Environment.  And  if  this  were 
guaranteed  we  should  also  have  the  conditions  for 
Eternal  Life  fulfilled.  But  what  if  the  Environment 
passed  away  altogether  ? What  if  the  earth  swept 
suddenly  into  the  sun  ? This  is  a change  of 
Environment  against  which  there  could  be  no 
precaution  and  for  which  there  could  be  as  little 
provision.  With  a changing  Environment  even, 
there  must  always  remain  the  dread  and  possibility 
of  a falling  out  of  correspondence.  At  the  best.  Life 
would  be  uncertain.  But  with  a changeless  Environ- 
ment— such  as  that  possessed  by  the  spiritual 
organism — the  perpetuity  of  the  correspondence,  so 
far  as  the  external  relation  is  concerned,  is  guar- 
anteed. This  quality  of  permanence  in  the  Environ- 
ment distinguishes  the  religious  relation  from  every 
other.  Why  should  not  the  musician’s  life  be  an 
Eternal  Life.?  Because,  for  one  thing,  the  musical 
world,  the  Environment  with  which  he  corresponds, 
is  not  eternal.  Even  if  his  correspondence  in  itself 


148 


ETERNAL  LIFE. 


could  last  eternally,  the  environing  material  things 
with  which  he  corresponds  must  pass  away.  His 
soul  might  last  for  ever — but  not  his  violin.  So 
the  man  of  the  world  might  IctSt  for  ever — but  not 
the  world.  His  Environment  not  eternal ; nor  are 
even  his  correspondences — the  world  passeth  away 
a7td  the  lust  thereof. 

We  find  then  that  man,  or  the  spiritual  man,  is 
equipped  with  two  sets  of  correspondences.  One 
set  possesses  the  quality  of  everlastingness,  the  other 
is  temporal.  But  unless  these  are  separated  by  some 
means  the  temporal  will  continue*  to  impair  and 
hinder  the  eternal.  The  final  preparation,  therefore, 
for  the  inheriting  of  Eternal  Life  must  consist  in  the 
abandonment  of  the  non-eternal  elements.  These 
must  be  unloosed  and  dissociated  from  the  higher 
elements.  And  this  is  effected  by  a closing  catas- 
trophe— Death. 

Death  ensues  because  certain  relations  in  the 
organism  are  not  adjusted  to  certain  relations  in  the 
Environment.  There  will  come  a time  in  each 
history  when  the  imperfect  correspondences  of  the 
organism  will  betray  themselves  by  a failure  to 
compass  some  necessary  adjustment.  This  is  why 
Death  is  associated  with  Imperfection.  Death  is  the 
necessary  result  of  Imperfection,  and  the  necessary 
end  of  it  Imperfect  correspondence  gives  imperfect 


ETERNAL  LIFE. 


249 


and  uncertain  Life.  ‘‘Perfect  correspondence/'  on 
the  other  hand,  according  to  Mr.  Herbert  Spencer, 
would  be  “ perfect  Life."  To  abolish  Death,  there- 
fore, all  that  would  be  necessary  would  be  te 
abolish  Imperfection.  But  it  is  the  claim  of  Chris- 
tianity that  it  can  abolish  Death.  And  it  is  signifi- 
cant to  notice  that  it  does  so  by  meeting  this  very 
demand  of  Science — it  abolishes  Imperfection. 

The  part  of  the  organism  which  begins  to  get  out 
of  correspondence  with  the  Organic  Environment  is 
the  only  part  which  is  in  vital  correspondence  with 
it.  Though  a fatal  disadvantage  to  the  natural 
man  to  be  thrown  out  of  correspondence  with  this 
Environment,  it  is  of  inestimable  importance  to  the 
spiritual  man.  For  so  long  as  it  is  maintained  the 
way  is  barred  for  a further  Evolution.  And  hence 
the  condition  necessary  for  the  further  Evolution  is 
that  the  spiritual  be  released  from  the  natural.  That 
is  to  say,  the  condition  of  the  further  Evolution  is 
Death.  Mors  janua  Vitco,  therefore,  becomes  a 
scientific  formula.  Death,  being  the  final  sifting  of 
all  the  correspondences,  is  the  indispensable  factor  of 
the  higher  Life.  In  the  language  of  Science,  not  less 
than  of  Scripture,  “ To  die  is  gain." 

The  sifting  of  the  cprrespondences  is  done  by 
Nature.  This  is  its  last  and  greatest  contribution 
to  mankind  Over  the  mouth  of  the  grave  the 


2S0 


ETERNAL  LIFE. 


perfect  and  the  imperfect  submit  to  their  final 
separation.  Each  goes  to  its  own — earth  to  earth, 
ashes  to  ashes,  dust  to  dust.  Spirit  to  Spirit  “ The 
dust  shall  return  to  the  earth  as  it  was ; and  the 
Spirit  shall  return  unto  God  who  gave  it” 


ENVIRONMENT. 


® When  I talked  with  an  ardent  missionary  and  pointed  out 
to  him  that  his  creed  found  no  support  in  my  experience^  he 
replied:  ^ It  is  not  so  in  your  experience^  but  is  so  in  the  other 
worldJ  I answer:  Other  world ! There  is  no  other  world, 

God  is  one  and  omnipresent;  here  or  nowhere  is  the  whole 


Emerson 


ENVIRONMENT. 


• Ye  are  complete  in  Him.” — PauL 

“Whatever  amount  of  power  an  organism  expends  in  an5 
shape  is  the  correlate  and  equivalent  of  a power  that  was  taken 
into  it  from  without.” — Herbert  Spencer, 

Students  of  Biography  will  observe  that  in  all  well- 
written  Lives  attention  is  concentrated  for  the  first 
few  chapters  upon  two  points.  We  are  first  intro- 
duced to  the  family  to  which  the  subject  of  memoir 
belonged.  The  grandparents,  or  even  the  more 
remote  ancestors,  are  briefly  sketched  and  their  chief 
characteristics  brought  prominently  into  view.  Then 
the  parents  themselves  are  photographed  in  detail. 
Their  appearance  and  physique,  their  character,  their 
disposition,  their  mental  qualities,  are  set  before  us 
in  a critical  analysis.  And  finally  we  are  asked  to 
observe  how  much  the  father  and  the  mother  respec- 
tively have  transmitted  of  their  peculiar  nature  to 
their  offspring.  How  faithfully  the  ancestral  lines 
have  met  in  the  latest  product,  how  mysteriously  the 


254 


ENVIRONMENT. 


joint  characteristics  of  body  and  mind  have  blended^ 
and  how  unexpected  yet  how  entirely  natural  a re- 
combination is  the  result — these  points  are  elaborated 
with  cumulative  effect  until  we  realize  at  last  how 
little  we  are  dealing  with  an  independent  unit,  how 
much  with  a survival  and  reorganization  of  what 
seemed  buried  in  the  grave. 

In  the  second  place,  we  are  invited  to  consider 
more  external  influences — schools  and  schoolmasters, 
neighbours,  home,  pecuniary  circumstances,  scenery, 
and,  by-and-by,  the  religious  and  political  atmo« 
sphere  of  the  time.  These  also  we  are  assured  have 
played  their  part  in  making  the  individual  what  he 
is.  We  can  estimate  these  early  influences  in  any 
particular  case  with  but  small  imagination  if  we  fail 
to  see  how  powerfully  they  also  have  moulded  mind 
and  character,  and  in  what  subtle  ways  they  have 
determined  the  course  of  the  future  life. 

This  twofold  relation  of  the  individual,  first,  to  his 
parents,  and  second,  to  his  circumstances,  is  not 
peculiar  to  human  beings.  These  two  factors  are 
responsible  for  making  all  living  organisms  what  they 
are.  When  a naturalist  attempts  to  unfold  the  life- 
history  of  any  animal,  he  proceeds  precisely  on  these 
same  lines.  Biography  is  really  a branch  of  Natural 
History ; and  the  biographer  who  discusses  his  hero 
as  the  resultant  of  these  two  tendencies,  follows  the 


ENVIRONMENT. 


255 


scientific  method  as  rigidly  as  Mr.  Darwin  in  study^ 
ing  “ Animals  and  Plants  under  Domestication.” 

Mr.  Darwin,  following  Weismann,  long  ago  pointed 
out  that  there  are  two  main  factors  in  all  Evolution--- 
the  nature  of  the  organism  and  the  nature  of  the 
conditions.  We  have  chosen  our  illustration  from 
thp  highest  or  human  species  in  order  to  define  the 
meaning  of  these  factors  in  the  clearest  way ; but  it 
must  be  remembered  that  the  development  of  man 
under  these  directive  influences  is  essentially  the 
same  as  that  of  any  other  organism  in  the  hands  of 
Nature.  We  are  dealing  therefore  with  universal 
Law.  It  will  still  further  serve  to  complete  the  con- 
ception of  the  general  principle  if  we  now  substitute 
for  the  casual  phrases  by  which  the  factors  have  been 
described  the  more  accurate  terminology  of  Science. 
Thus  what  Biography  describes  as  parental  influences, 
Biology  would  speak  of  as  Heredity  ; and  all  that  is 
involved  in  the  second  factor — the  action  of  external 
circumstances  and  surroundings — the  naturalist  would 
include  under  the  single  term  Environment.  * These 
two,  Heredity  and  Environment,  are  the  master- 
influences  of  the  organic  world.  These  have  made 
all  of  us  what  we  are.  These  forces  are  still  cease- 
lessly playing  upon  all  our  lives.  And  he  who  truly 
understands  these  influences  ; he  who  has  decided 
how  much  to  allow  to  each ; he  who  can  regulate 


356 


ENVIRONMENT. 


new  forces  as  they  arise,  or  adjust  them  to  the  old, 
so  directing  them  as  at  one  moment  to  make  them 
co-operate,  at  another  to  counteract  one  another,  un> 
derstands  the  rationale  of  personal  development.  To 
seize  continuously  the  opportunity  of  more  and  more 
perfect  adjustment  to  better  and  higher  conditions,  to 
balance  some  inward  evil  with  some  purer  influence 
acting  from  without,  in  a word  to  make  our  Environ- 
ment at  the  same  time  that  it  is  making  us, — these 
are  the  secrets  of  a well-ordered  and  successful  life. 

In  the  spiritual  world,  also,  the  subtle  influences 
which  form  and  transform  the  soul  are  Heredity  and 
Environment.  And  here  especially  where  all  is  in- 
visible, where  much  that  we  feel  to  be  real  is  yet  so 
ill-defined,  it  becomes  of  vital  practical  moment  to 
clarify  the  atmosphere  as  far  as  possible  with  con- 
ceptions borrowed  from  the  natural  life.  Few  things 
are  less  understood  than  the  conditions  of  the  spi- 
ritual life.  The  distressing  incompetence  of  which 
most  of  us  are  conscious  in  trying  to  work  out  our 
spiritual  experience  is  due  perhaps  less  to  the 
diseased  v/ill  which  we  commonly  blame  for  it  than 
to . imperfect  knowledge  of  the  right  conditions.  It 
does  not  occur  to  us  how  natural  the  spiritual  is. 
We  still  strive  for  some  strange  transcendent  thing  ; 
we  seek  to  promote  life  by  methods  as  unnatural  as 
they  prove  unsuccessful ; and  only  the  utter  incom. 


ENVIRONMENT. 


257 


prehensibility  of  the  whole  region  prevents  us  seeing 
fully — what  we  already  half-suspect — how  completely 
we  are  missing  the  road.  Living  in  the  spiritual 
world,  nevertheless,  is  just  as  simple  as  living  in  the 
natural  world  ; and  it  is  the  same  kind  of  simplicity. 
It  is  the  same  kind  of  simplicity  for  it  is  the  same 
kind  of  world — there  are  not  two  kinds  of  worlds. 
The  conditions  of  life  in  the  one  are  the  conditions  of 
life  in  the  other.  And  till  these  conditions  are  sen- 
sib.ly  grasped,  as  the  conditions  of  all  life,  it  is  impos- 
sible that  the  personal  effort  after  the  highest  life 
should  be  other  than  a blind  struggle  carrie4  on  in 
fruitless  sorrow  and  humiliation. 

Of  these  two  universal  factors,  Heredity  and  En- 
vironment, it  is  unnecessary  to  balance  the  relative 
importance  here.  The  main  influence,  unquestion- 
ably, must  be  assigned  to  the  former.  In  practice, 
however,  and  for  an  obvious  reason,  we  are  chiefly 
concerned  with  the  latter.  What  Heredity  has  to  do 
for  us  is  determined  outside  ourselves.  No  man  can 
select  his  own  parents.  But  every  man  to  some 
extent  can  choose  his  own  Environment.  His  rela- 
tion to  it,  however  largely  determined  by  Heredity 
in  the  first  instance,  is  always  open  to  alteration. 
And  so  great  is  his  control  over  Environment 
and  so  radical  its  influence  over  him,  that  he  can 
direct  it  as  either  to  undo,  modify,  perpetuate 


S 


ENl^IRONMENT. 


»S8 

or  intensify  the  earlier  hereditary  influences  within 
certain  limits.  But  the  aspects  of  Environment 
which  we  have  now  to  consider  do  not  involve  us  in 
questions  of  such  complexity.  In  what  high  and 
mystical  sense,  also,  Heredity  applies  to  the  spiritual 
organism  we  need  not  just  now  inquire.  In  the  sim- 
pler relations  of  the  more  external  factor  we  shall 
find  a large  and  fruitful  field  for  study. 

The  Influence  of  Environment  may  be  investigated 
in  two  main  aspects.  First,  one  might  discuss  the 
modern  and  very  interesting  question  as  to  the  power 
of  Environment  to  induce  what  is  known  to  recent 
science  as  Variation.  A change  in  the  surroundings 
of  any  animal,  it  is  now  well-known,  can  so  react 
upon  it  as  to  cause  it  to  change.  By  the  attempt, 
conscious  or  unconscious,  to  adjust  itself  to  the  new 
conditions,  a true  physiological  change  is  gradually 
wrought  within  the  organism.  Hunter,  for  example, 
in  a classical  experiment,  so  changed  the  Environ- 
ment of  a sea-gull  by  keeping  it  in  captivity  that 
it  could  only  secure  a .grain  diet.  The  effect  was  to 
modify  the  stomach  of  the  bird,  normally  adapted  to 
a fish  diet,  until  in  time  it  came  to  resemble  in  struc- 
ture the  gizzard  of  an  ordinary  grain-feeder  such  as 
the  pigeon.  Holmgrdn  again  reversed  this  experi- 
ment by  feeding  pigeons  for  a lengthened  period  on  a 
meat-diet,  with  the  result  that  the  gizzard  became 


ENVIRONMENT. 


259 


transformed  into  the  carnivorous  stomach.  Mr 
Alfred  Russel  Wallace  mentions  the  case  of  a 
Brazilian  parrot  which  changes  its  coloui  from  green 
to  fed  or  yellow  when  fed  on  the  fat  of  certain  fishes, 
Not  only  changes  of  food,  however,  but  changes  ol 
climate  and  of  temperature,  changes  in  surrounding 
organisms,  in  the  case  of  marine  animals  even 
changes  of  pressure,  of  ocean  currents,  of  light,  and 
of  many  other  circumstances,  are  known  to  exert  a 
powerful  modifying  influence  upon  living  organisms. 
These  relations  are  still  being  worked  out  in  many 
directions,  but  the  influence  of  Environment  as  a 
prime  factor  in  Variation  is  now  a recognised  doctrine 
of  science.^ 

Even  the  popular  mind  has  been  struck  with  the 
curious  adaptation  of  nearly  all  animals  to  their 
habitat^  for  example  In  the  matter  of  colour.  The 
sandy  hue  of  the  sole  and  flounder,  the  white  of  the 
polar  bear  with  its  suggestion  of  Arctic  snows,  the 
stripes  of  the  Bengal  tiger — as  if  the  actual  reeds  of 
its  native  jungle  had  nature-printed  themselves  on  its 
hide  ; — these,  and  a hundred  others  which  will  occur 


* Vide  Karl  Semper^s  The  Natural  Conditions  of  Existence  * 
as  they  affect  Animal  Life;”  Wallace’s  Tropical  Nature;” 
Weismann’s ‘‘ Studies  in  the  Theory  of  Descent;”  Darwin’5 
‘‘Animals  and  Plants  under  Domestication” 


s6o 


ENVIRONMENT, 


to  every  one,  are  marked  instances  of  adaptation  to 
Environment  induced,  by  Natural  Selection  or  other- 
wise, for  the  purpose,  obviously  in  these  cases  at  least., 
of  protection. 

To  continue  the  investigation  of  the  modifying 
action  of  Environment  into  the  moral  and  spiritual 
spheres,  would  be  to  open  a fascinating  and  sug- 
gestive inquiry.  One  might  show  how  the  moral 
man  is  acted  upon  and  changed  continuously  by  the 
influences,  secret  and  open,  of  his  surroundings,  by 
the  tone  of  society,  by  the  company  he  keeps,  by  his 
occupation,  by  the  books  he  reads,  by  Nature,  by  all, 
in  short,  that  constitutes  the  habitual  atmosphere  of 
his  thoughts  and  the  little  world  of  his  daily  choice. 
Or  one  might  go  deeper  still  and  prove  how  the 
spiritual  life  also  is  modified  from  outside  sources — 
its  health  or  disease,  its  growth  or  ‘decay,  all  its 
changes  for  better  or  for  worse  being  determined  by 
the  varying  and  successive  circumstances  in  which  the 
religious  habits  are  cultivated.  But  we  must  rather 
transfer  our  attention  to  a second  aspect  of  Environ- 
ment, not  perhaps  so  fascinating  but  yet  more  im- 
portant. 

So  much  of  the  modern  discussion  of  Environment 
^revolves  round  the  mere  question  of  Variation  that 
one  is  apt  to  overlook  a previous  question.  Environ- 
ment as  a factor  in  life  is  not  exhausted  when  we 


ENVIRONMENT. 


261 


have  realized  its  modifying  influence.  Its  signifi- 
cance is  scarcely  touched.  The  great  function  of 
Environment  is  not  to  modify  but  to  sustain.  In 
sustaining  life,  it  is  true,  it  modifies.  But  the  latter 
influence  is  incidental,  the  former  essential.  Our 
Environment  is  that  in  which  we  live  and  move  and 
have  our  being.  Without  it  we  should  neither  live 
nor  move  nor  have  any  being.  In  the  organism  lies 
the  principle  of  life ; in  the  Environment  are  the 
conditions  of  life.  Without  the  fulfilment  of  these 
conditions,  which  are  wholly  supplied  by  Environ- 
ment, there  can  be  no  life.  An  organism  in  itself  is 
but  a part ; Nature  is  its  complement.  Alone,  cut 
off  from  its  surroundings,  it  is  not.  Alone,  cut  off 
from  my  surroundings,  I am  not — physically  I an^ 
not.  I am,  only  as  I am  sustained.  I continue  only 
as  I receive.  My  Environment  may  modify  me,  but 
it  has  first  to  keep  me.  And  all  the  time  its  secret 
transforming  power  is  indirectly  moulding  body  and 
mind  it  is  directly  active  in  the  more  open  task  of 
ministering  to  my  myriad  wants  and  from  hour  to 
hour  sustaining  life  itself. 

To  understand  the  sustaining  influence  of  Envir- 
onment in  the  animal  world,  one  has  only  to  recall 
what  the  biologist  terms  the  extrinsic  or  subsidiary 
conditions  of  vitality.  Every  living  thing  normally 
requires  for  its  development  an  Environment  con- 


262 


ENVIRONMENT. 


taming  air,  light,  heat,  and  water.  In  addition  to 
these,  if  vitality  is  to  be  prolonged  for  any  length  of 
time,  and  it  it  is  to  be  accompanied  with  growth  and 
the  expenditure  of  energy,  there  must  be  a constant 
supply  of  food.  When  we  simply  remember  how 
indispensable  food  is  to  growth  and  work,  and  when 
we  further  bear  in  mind  that  the  food-supply  is  solely 
contributed  by  the  Environment,  we  shall  realize  at 
once  the  meaning  and  the  truth  of  the  proposition 
that  without  Environment  there  can  be  no  life. 
Seventy  per  cent,  at  least  of  the  human  body  is  made 
of  pure  water,  the  rest  of  gases  and  earths.  These 
have  all  come  from  Environment.  Through  the 
secret  pores  of  the  skin  two  pounds  of  water  are 
exhaled  daily  from  every  healthy  adult  The  supply 
is  kept  up  by  Environment.  The  Environment  is 
really  an  unappropriated  part  of  ourselves.  Definite 
portions  are  continuously  abstracted  from  it  and 
added  to  the  organism.  And  so  long  as  the  organ- 
ism continues  to  grow,  act,  think,  speak,  work,  or 
perform  any  other  function  demanding  a supply  of 
energy,  there  is  a constant,  simultaneous,  and  pro- 
portionate drain  upon  its  surroundings. 

This  is  a truth  in  the  physical,  and  therefore  in 
the  spiritual,  world  of  so  great  importance  that  we 
shall  not  mis-spend  time  if  we  follow  it,  for  furthei 
confirmation,  into  another  department  of  nature. 


ENVIRONMENT. 


263 


Its  significance  in  Biology  is  self-evident ; let  us 
appeal  to  Chemistry. 

When  a piece  of  coal  is  thrown  on  the  fire,  we  say 
that  it  will  radiate  into  the  room  a certain  quantity 
of  heat.  This  heat,  in  the  popular  conception,  is 
supposed  to  reside  in  the  coal  and  to  be  set  free 
during  the  process  of  combustion.  In  reality,  how- 
ever, the  heat  energy  is  only  in  part  contained  in  the 
coal.  It  is  contained  just  as  truly  in  the  coals 
Environment — that  is  to  say,  in  the  oxygen  of  the 
air.  The  atoms  of  carbon  which  compose  the  coal 
have  a powerful  affinity  for  the  oxygen  of  the  air. 
Whenever  they  are  made  to  approach  within  a certain 
distance  of  one  another,  by  the  initial  application  of 
heat,  they  rush  together  with  inconceivable  velocity. 
The  heat  which  appears  at  this  moment,  comes 
neither  from  the  carbon  alone,  nor  from  the  oxygen 
alone.  These  two  substances  are  really  inconsum- 
able, and  continue  to  exist,  after  they  meet  in  a 
combined  form,  as  carbonic  acid  gas.  The  heat  is 
due  to  the  energy  developed  by  the  chemical  em- 
brace, the  precipitate  rushing  together  of  the  mole- 
cules of  carbon  and  the  molecules  of  oxygen.  It 
comes,  therefore,  partly  from  the  coal  and  partly 
from  the  Environment.  Coal  alone  never  could 
produce  heat,  neither  alone  could  Environment.  The 
two  are  mutually  dependent  And  although  in 


264 


ENVIRONMENT. 


nearly  all  the  arts  we  credit  everything  to  the 
substance  which  we  can  weigh  and  handle,  it  is 
certain  that  in  most  cases  the  larger  debt  is  due  to 
an  invisible  Environment. 

This  is  one  of  those  great  commonplaces  which 
slip  out  of  general  reckoning  by  reason  of  their  very 
largeness  and  simplicity.  How  profound,  neverthe- 
less, are  the  issues  which  hang  on  this  elementary 
truth,  we  shall  discover  immediately.  Nothing  in 
this  age  is  more  needed  in  every  department  of 
knowledge  than  the  rejuvenescence  of  the  common- 
place. In  the  spiritual  world  especially,  he  will  be 
wise  who  courts  acquaintance  with  the  most  ordinary 
and  transparent  facts  of  Nature ; and  in  laying  the 
foundations  for  a religious  life  he  will  make  no 
unworthy  beginning  who  carries  with  him  an  im- 
pressive sense  of  so  obvious  a truth  as  that  without 
Environment  there  can  be  no  life. 

For  what  does  this  amount  to  in  the  spiritual 
world  ? Is  it  not  merely  the  scientific  re-statement 
of  the  reiterated  aphorism  of  Christ,  Without  Me 
ye  can  do  nothing  ? There  is  in  the  spiritual 
organism  a principle  of  life  ; but  that  is  not  self- 
existent.  It  requires  a second  factor,  a something 
in  which  to  live  and  move  and  have  its  being,  an 
Environment.  Without  this  it  cannot  live  or  move 
or  have  any  being.  Without  Environment  the  soul 


ENVIRONMENT. 


205 


is  as  the  carbon  without  the  oxygen,  as  the  fish 
without  the  water,  as  the  animal  frame  without  the 
extrinsic  conditions  of  vitality. 

And  what  is  the  spiritual  Environment  ? It  is 
God.  Without  this,  therefore,  there  is  no  life,  no 
thought,  no  energy,  nothing — “ without  Me  ye  can 
do  nothing.” 

The  cardinal  error  in  the  religious  life  is  to  attempt 
to  live  without  an  Environment.  Spiritual  experi- 
ence occupies  itself,  not  too  much,  but  too  exclu- 
sively, with  one  factor — the  soul.  We  delight  in 
dissecting  this  much  tortured  faculty,  from  time  to 
time,  in  search  of  a certain  something  which  we  call 
our  faith — forgetting  that  faith  is  but  an  attitude,  an 
empty  hand  for  grasping  an  environing  PresencCc 
And  when  we  feel  the  need  of  a power  by  which  to 
overcome  the  world,  how  often  do  we  not  seek  to 
generate  it  within  ourselves  by  some  forced  process, 
some  fresh  girding  of  the  will,  some  strained  activity 
which  only  leaves  the  soul  in  further  exhaustion  ? 
To  examine  ourselves  is  good  ; but  useless  unless  we 
also  examine  Environment.  To  bewail  our  weakness 
is  right,  but  not  remedial.  The  cause  must  be  in- 
vestigated as  well  as  the  result.  And  yet,  because 
we  never  see  the  other  half  of  the  problem,  our 
failures  even  fail  to  instruct  us.  After  each  new 
collapse  we  begin  our  life  anew,  but  on  the  old 


266 


ENVIRONMENT. 


conditions ; and  the  attempt  ends  as  usual  in  the 
repetition — in  the  circumstances  the  inevitable  repe* 
tition — of  the  old  disaster.  Not  that  at  times  we  do 
not  obtain  glimpses  of  the  true  state  of  the  case. 
After  seasons  of  much  discouragement,  with  the  sore 
sense  upon  us  of  our  abject  feebleness,  we  do  confer 
with  ourselves,  insisting  for  the  thousandth  time, 
‘‘My  soul,  wait  thou  only  upon  God.”  But,  the 
lesson  is  soon  forgotten.  The  strength  supplied  we 
speedily  credit  to  our  own  achievement ; and  even 
the  temporary  success  is  mistaken  for  a symptom  of 
improved  inward  vitality.  Once  more  we  become 
self-existent.  Once  more  we  go  on  living  without 
an  Environment.  And  once  more,  after  days  of 
wasting  without  repairing,  of  spending  without  re- 
plenishing, we  begin  to  perish  with  hunger,  only 
returning  to  God  again,  as  a last  resort,  when  we 
have  reached  starvation  point. 

Now  why  do  we  do  this?  Why  do  we  seek  to 
breathe  without  an  atmosphere,  to  drink  without  a 
well  ? Why  this  unscientific  attempt  to  sustain  life 
for  weeks  at  a time  without  an  Environment  ? It  is 
because  we  have  never  truly  seen  the  necessity  for  an 
Environment  We  have  not  been  working  with  a 
principle.  We  are  told  to  “wait  only  upon  God,’ 
but  we  do  not  know  why.  It  has  never  been  as  clear 
to  us  that  without  God  the  soul  will  die  as  that  with< 


ENVIRONMENT. 


267 


out  food  the  body  will  perish.  In  short,  we  have 
never  comprehended  the  doctrine  of  the  Persistence 
of  Force.  Instead  of  being  content  to  transform 
energy  we  have  tried  to  create  it. 

The  Law  of  Nature  here  is  as  clear  as  Science  can 
make  it.  In  the  words  of  Mr.  Herbert  Spencer,  It 
is  a corollary  from  that  primordial  truth  which,  as  we 
have  seen,  underlies  all  other  truths,  that  whatever 
amount  of  power  an  organism  expends  in  any  shape 
is  the  correlate  and  equivalent  of  a power  that  was 
taken  into  it  from  without.”^  We  are  dealing  here 
with  a simple  question  of  dynamics.  Whatever 
energy  the  soul  expends  must  first  be  “ taken  into 
it  from  without.”  We  are  not  Creators,  but  crea- 
tures ; God  is  our  refuge  and  strength.  Communion 
with  God,  therefore,  is  a scientific  necessity ; and 
nothing  will  more  help  the  defeated  spirit  which  is 
struggling  in  the  wreck  of  its  religious  life  than  a 
common-sense  hold  of  this  plain  biological  principle 
that  without  Environment  he  can  do  nothing.  What 
he  wants  is  not  an  occasional  view,  but  a principle — 
a basal  principle  like  this,  broad  as  the  universe, 
solid  as  nature.  In  the  natural  world  we  act  upon 
this  law  unconsciously.  We  absorb  heat,  breathe  air, 
draw  on  Environment  all  but  automatically  for  meat 


* ^ Principles  of  Biology,”  p 57, 


z6S 


EISrVIjRONMENT. 


and  drink,  for  the  nourishment  of  the  senses,  foi 
mental  stimulus,  for  all  that,  penetrating  us  from 
without,  can  prolong,  enrich,  and  elevate  life.  But  in 
the  spiritual  world  we  have  all  this  to  learn.  We  are 
new  creatures,  and  even  the  bare  living  has  to  be 
acquired. 

Now  the  great  point  in  learning  to  live  is  to  live 
naturally.  As  closely  as  possible  we  must  follow  the 
broad,  clear  lines  of  the  natural  life.  And  there  are 
three  things  especially  which  it  is  necessary  for  us  to 
keep  continually  in  view.  The  first  is  that  the 
organism  contains  within  itself  only  one-half  of  what 
is  essential  to  life ; the  second  is  that  the  other  half 
is  contained  in  the  Environment ; the  third,  that  the 
condition  of  receptivity  is  simple  union  between  the 
organism  and  the  Environment. 

Translated  into  the  language  of  religion  these 
propositions  yield,  and  place  on  a scientific  basis, 
truths  of  immense  practical  interest.  To  say,  first, 
that  the  organism  contains  within  itself  only  one-half 
of  what  is  essential  to  life,  is  to  repeat  the  evangelical 
confession,  so  worn  and  yet  so  true  to  universal 
experience,  of  the  utter  helplessness  of  man.  Who 
has  not  come  to  the  conclusion  that  he  is  but  a part, 
a fraction  of  some  larger  whole  ? Who  does  not  miss 
at  every  turn  of  his  life  an  absent  God  ? That  man 
is  but  a part,  he  knows,  for  there  is  room  in  him 


jlNVIRONMENT, 


269 

or  more.  That  God  is  the  other  part,  he  feels,  be- 
cause at  times  He  satisfies  his  need.  Who  does  not 
tremble  often  under  that  sicklier  symptom  of  his  in- 
completeness, his  want  of  spiritual  energy,  his  help- 
lessness with  sin  ? But  now  he  understands  both — 
the  void  in  his  life,  the  powerlessness  of  his  will.  He 
understands  that,  like  all  other  energy,  spiritual 
power  is  contained  in  Environment.  He  finds  here  at 
last  the  true  root  of  all  human  frailty,  emptiness, 
nothingness,  sin.  This  is  why  ‘‘  without  Me  ye  can 
do  nothing.*’  Powerlessness  is  the  normal  state  not 
only  of  this  but  of  every  organism — of  every  orgaii- 
ism  apart  from  its  Environment. 

The  entire  dependence  of  the  soul  upon  God  is  not 
an  exceptional  mystery,  nor  is  man’s  helplessness  an 
arbitrary  and  unprecedented  phenomenon.  It  is  the 
law  of  all  Nature.  The  spiritual  man  is  not  taxed 
beyond  the  natural.  He  is  not  purposely  handi- 
capped by  singular  limitations  or  unusual  incapa- 
cities. God  has  not  designedly  made  the  religious 
life  as  hard  as  possible.  The  arrangements  for  the 
spiritual  life  are  the  same  as  for  the  natural  life. 
When  in  their  hours  of  unbelief  men  challenge  their 
Creator  for  placing  the  obstacle  of  human  frailty  in 
the  way  of  their  highest  development,  their  protest  is 
against  the  order  of  nature  They  object  to  the  sun 
for  being  the  source  of  energy  and  not  the  engine,  to 


270 


ENVIRONMENT. 


the  carbonic  acid  being  in  the  air  and  not  in  the 
plant  They  would  equip  each  organism  with  a 
personal  atmosphere,  each  brain  with  a private  store 
of  energy  ; they  would  grow  corn  in  the  interior  of 
the  body,  and  make  bread  by  a special  apparatus  in 
the  digestive  organs.  They  must,  in  short,  have  the 
creature  transformed  into  a Creator.  The  organism 
must  either  depend  on  his  environment,  or  be  self- 
sufficient  But  who  will  not  rather  approve  the 
arrangement  by  which  man  in  his  creatural  life  may 
have  unbroken  access  to  an  Infinite  Power  ? What 
soul  will  seek  to  remain  self-luminous  when  it  knows 
that  “The  Lord  God  is  a Sim"'?  Who  will  not 
willingly  exchange  his  shallow  vessel  for  Christs 
well  of  living  water  } Even  if  the  organism,  launched 
into  being  like  a ship  putting  out  to  sea,  possessed  a 
full  equipment,  its  little  store  must  soon  come  to  an 
end.  But  in  contact  with  a large  and  bounteous 
Environment  its  supply  is  limitless.  In  every  direc- 
tion its  resources  are  infinite. 

There  is  a modern  school  which  protests  against  the 
doctrine  of  man’s  inability  as  the  heartless  fiction  of 
a past  theology.  While  some  forms  of  that  dogma,  to 
any  one  who  knows  man,  are  incapable  of  defence, 
there  are  others  which,  to  any  one  who  knows  Nature, 
are  incapable  of  denial.  Those  who  oppose  it,  in 
their  jealousy  for  humanity,  credit  the  organisitt  with 


ENVIRONMENT. 


2if 

the  properties  of  Environment.  All  true  theology, 
on  the  otlier  hand,  has  remained  loyal  to  at  least  the 
root-idea  in  this  truth.  The  New  Testament  is  no- 
where more  impressive  than  where  it  insists  cm  the 
fact  of  man’s  dependence.  In  its  view  the  first 
step  in  religion  is  for  man  to  feel  his  helplessness 
Christ’s  first  beatitude  is  to  the  poor  in  spirit.  The 
condition  of  entrance  into  the  spiritual  kingdom  is  to 
possess  the  child-spirit — that  state  of  mind  com- 
bining at  once  the  profoundest  helplessness  with  the 
most  artless  feeling  of  dependence.  Substantially 
the  same  idea  underlies  the  countless  passages  in 
which  Christ  affirms  that  He  has  not  come  to  call 
the  righteous,  but  sinners  to  repentance.  And  in 
that  farewell  discourse  into  which  the  Great  Teacher 
poured  the  most  burning  convictions  of  His  life,  He 
gives  to  this  doctrine  an  ever  increasing  emphasis. 
No  words  could  be  more  solemn  or  arresting  than 
the  sentence  in  the  last  great  allegory  devoted  to  this 
theme,  ‘‘As  the  branch  cannot  bear  fruit  of  itself 
except  it  abide  in  the  vine,  no  more  can  ye  except  ye 
abide  in  Me.”  The  word  here,  it  will  be  observed 
again,  is  cannot  It  is  the  imperative  of  natural  law. 
Fruit-bearing  without  Christ  is  not  an  improbability, 
but  an  impossibility.  As  well  expect  the  natural 
fruit  to  flourish  without  air  and  heat,  without  soil  and 
sunshine  How  thoroughly  also  Paul  grasped  this 


272 


ENVIRONMENT. 


truth  is  apparent  from  a hundred  pregnant  passages 
in  which  he  echoes  his  Master’s  teaching.  To  him 
life  was  hid  with  Christ  in  God.  And  that  he 
embraced  this  not  as  a theory  but  as  an  experimental 
truth  we  gather  from  his  constant  confession,  When 
I am  weak,  then  am  I strong.” 

This  leads  by  a natural  transition  to  the  second 
of  the  three  points  we  are  seeking  to  illustrate. 
We  have  seen  that  the  organism  contains  within 
itself  only  one  half  of  what  is  essential  to  life. 
We  have  next  to  observe,  as  the  complement  of 
this,  how  the  second  half  is  contained  in  the  En- 
vironment. 

One  result  of  the  due  apprehension  of  our 
personal  helplessness  will  be  that  we  shall  no  longer 
waste  our  time  over  the  impossible  task  of  manu- 
facturing energy  for  ourselves.  Our  science  will 
bring  to  an  abrupt  end  the  long  series  of  severe 
experiments  in  which  we  have  indulged  in  the 
hope  of  finding  a perpetual  motion.  And  having 
decided  upon  this  once  for  all,  our  first  step  in 
seeking  a more  satisfactory  state  of  things  must 
be  to  find  a i:ew  source  of  energy.  Following 
Nature,  only  one  course  is  open  to  us.  We  must 
refer  to  Environment.  The  natural  life  ewes  all  to 
Environment,  so  must  the  spiritual.  Now  the 
Environment  of  the  spiritual  life  is  God  As  Nature 


ENVIRONMENT, 


273 


therefore  forms  the  complement  of  the  natural  life, 
God  is  the  complement  of  the  spiritual. 

The  proof  of  this } That  Nature  is  not  more 
natural  to  my  body  than  God  is  to  my  soul  Every 
animal  and  plant  has  its  own  Environment  And 
the  further  one  inquires  into  the  relations  of  the 
one  to  the  other,  the  more  one  sees  the  marvellous 
intricacy  and  beauty  of  the  adjustments.  ^ These 
wonderful  adaptations  of  each  organism  to  its  sur- 
roundings— of  the  fish  to  the  water,  of  the  eagle 
to  the  air,  of  the  insect  to  the  forest-bed ; and  ol 
each  part  of  every  organism — the  fish’s  swim-bladder, 
the  eagle’s  eye,  the  insect’s  breathing  tubes — which 
the . old  argument  from  design  brought  home  to  ue 
with  such  enthusiasm,  inspire  us  still  with  a sense 
of  the  boundless  resource  and  skill  of  Nature  in 
perfecting  her  arrangements  for  each  single  life, 
Down  to  the  last  detail  the  world  is  made  for  what 
is  in  it ; and  by  whatever  process  things  are  as  they 
are,  all  organisms  find  in  surrounding  Nature  the 
ample  complement  of  themselves.  Man,  too,  finds 
in  his  Environment  provision  for  all  capacities,  scope 
for  the  exercise  of  every  faculty,  room  for  the 
indulgence  of  each  appetite,  a just  supply  for  every 
want  So  the  spiritual  man  at  the  apex  of  the 
pyramid  of  life  finds  in  the  vaster  range  of  his 
Environment  a provision,  as  much  higher,  it  is  true 


T 


874 


ENVIRONMENT. 


as  he  is  higher,  but  as  delicately  adjusted  to  his 
varying  needs.  And  all  this  is  supplied  to  him 
j^;st  as  the  lower  organisms  are  ministered  to  by 
the  lower  environment,  in  the  same  simple  ways, 
in  the  same  constant  sequence,  as  appropriately  and 
as  lavishly.  We  fail  to  praise  the  ceaseless  ministry 
of  the  great  inanimate  world  around  us  only  because 
its  kindness  is  unobtrusive.  Nature  is  always  noise- 
less. All  her  greatest  gifts  are  given  in  secret.  And 
we  forget  how  truly  every  good  and  perfect  gift 
comes  from  without,  and  from  above,  because  no 
pause  in  her  changeless  beneficence  teaches  us  th^ 
sad  lessons  of  deprivation. 

It  is  not  a strange  thing,  then,  for  the  soul  to 
find  its  life  in  God.  This  is  its  native  air.  God 
as  the  Environment  of  the  soul  has  been  from 
the  remotest  age  the  doctrine  of  all  the  deepest 
thinkers  in  religion.  How  profoundly  Hebrew 
poetry  is  saturated  with  this  high  thought  will  appear 
when  we  try  to  conceive  of  it  with  this  left  out 
True  poetry  is  only  science  in  another  form.  And 
long  before  it  was  possible  for  religion  to  give 
scientific  expression  to  its  greatest  truths,  men  of 
insight  uttered  themselves  in  psalms  which  could 
not  have  been  truer  to  Nature  had  the  most  modern 
light  controlled  the  inspiration.  “ As  the  hart 
pantoth  after  the  water-brooks,  so  panteth  my  sooJ 


ENVIRONMENT. 


275 


after  Thee,  O God.”  What  fine  sense  of  the  analogy 
of  the  natural  and  the  spiritual  does  not  underlie 
these  words.  As  the  hart  after  its  Environment,  so 
inan  after  his ; as  the  water-brooks  are  fitly  designed 
to  meet  the  natural  wants,  so  fitly  does  God  imple- 
ment the  spiritual  need  of  man.  It  will  be  noticed 
that  in  the  Hebrew  poets  the  longing  for  God  never 
strikes  one  as  morbid,  or  unnatural  to  the  men  who 
uttered  it.  It  is  as  natural  to  them  to  long  for 
God  as  for  the  swallow  to  seek  her  nest.  Through- 
out all  their  images  no  suspicion  rises  within  us 
that  they  are  exaggerating.  We  feel  how  truly  they 
are  reading  themselves,  their  deepest  selves.  No 
false  note  occurs  in  all  their  aspiration.  There  is 
no  weariness  even  in  their  ceaseless  sighing,  except 
the  lover’s  weariness  for  the  absent — if  they  would 
fly  away,  it  is  only  to  be  at  rest.  Men  who  have 
no  soul  can  only  wonder  at  this.  Men  who  have 
a soul,  but  with  little  faith,  can  only  envy  it.  How 
joyous  a thing  it  was  to  the  Hebrews  to  seek  their 
God  ! How  artlessly  they  call  upon  Him  to  enter- 
tain them  in  His  pavilion,  to  cover  them  with  His 
feathers,  to  hide  them  in  His  secret  place,  to  hold 
them  in  the  hollow  of  His  hand  or  stretch  around 
them  the  everlasting  arms  ! These  men  were  true 
children  of  Nature.  As  the  humming-bird  among 
its  own  palm-trees,  as  the  ephemera  in  the  sunshine 


ENVIRONMENT. 


476 

of  a summer  evening,  so  they  lived  their  joyous 
lives.  And  even  the  full  share  of  the  sadder  experi- 
ences of  life  which  came  to  all  of  them  but  diove 
them  the  further  into  the  Secret  Place,  and  led  them 
with  more  consecration  to  make,  as  they  expressed 
it,  the  Lord  their  portion.”  All  that  has  been  said 
since  from  Marcus  Aurelius  to  Swedenborg,  from 
Augustine  to  Schleiermacher  of  a besetting  God  as 
the  final  complement  of  humanity  is  but  a repetition 
of  the  Plebrew  poets’  faith.  And  even  the  New 
Testament  has  nothing  higher  to  offer  man  than 
this.  The  psalmist’s  God  is  our  refuge  and 
strength  ” is  only  the  earlier  form,  less  defined,  less 
practicable,  but  not  less  noble,  of  Christ’s  ‘‘Come 
unto  Me,  and  I will  give  you  rest.” 

There  is  a brief  phrase  of  Paul’s  which  defines 
the  relation  with  almost  scientific  accuracy, — “Ye 
are  complete  in  Him.”  In  this  is  summed  up  the 
whole  of  the  Bible  anthropology — rthe  completeness 
of  man  in  God,  his  incompleteness  apart  from  God. 

If  it  be  asked.  In  what  is  man  incomplete,  or, 
In  what  does  God  complete  him  ? the  question  is 
a wide  one.  But  it  may  serve  to  show  at  least  the 
diiection  in  which  the  Divine  Environment  forms 
the  complement  of  human  life  if  we  ask  ourselves 
once  more  what  it  is  in  life  that  needs  comple-* 
menting.  And  to  this  question  we  receive  the 


ENVIRONMENT. 


277 


significant  answer  that  it  is  in  the  higher  depart- 
ments alone,  or  mainly,  that  the  incompleteness  of 
our  life  appears.  The  lower  departments  of  Nature 
are  already  complete  enough.  The  world  itself  is 
about  as  good  a world  as  might  be.  It  has  been 
long  in  the  making,  its  furniture  is  all  in,  its  laws 
are  in  perfect  working  order ; and  although  wise 
men  at  various  times  have  suggested  improvements, 
there  is  on  the  whole  a tolerably  unanimous  vote 
of  confidence  in  things  as  they  exist.  The  Divine 
Environment  has  little  more  to  do  for  this  planet 
so  far  as  we  can  see,  and  so  far  as  the  existing 
generation  is  concerned.  Then  the  lower  organic 
life  of  the  world  is  also  so  far  complete.  God, 
through  Evolution  or  otherwise,  may  still  have 
finishing  touches  to  add  here  and  there,  but  alreadj^ 
it  is  “ all  very  good.^*  It  is  difficult  to  conceive  any- 
thing better  of  its  kind  than  a lily  or  a cedar,  an 
ant  or  an  ant-eater.  These  organisms,  so  far  as  we 
can  judge,  lack  nothing.  It  might  be  said  of  them, 
they  are  complete  in  Nature.”  Of  man  also,  of 
man  the  animal,  it  may  be  affirmed  that  his  En- 
vironment satisfies  him.  He  has  food  and  drink, 
and  good  food  and  good  drink.  And  there  is  in 
him  no  purely  animal  want  which  is  not  really 
provided  for,  and  that  apparently  in  the  happiest 
possible  way. 


a;3 


ENVIRONMENT. 


But  the  moment  we  pass  beyond  the  mere  animal 
life  we  begin  to  come  upon  an  incompleteness.  The 
symptoms  at  first  are  slight,  and  betray  themselves 
only  by  an  unexplained  restlessness  or  a dull  sense 
of  want.  Then  the  feverishness  increases,  becomes 
more  defined,  and  passes  slowly  into  abiding  pain. 
To  some  come  darker  moments  when  the  unrest 
deepens  into  a mental  agony  of  which  all  the  other 
woes  of  earth  are  mockeries — moments  when  the 
forsaken  soul  can  only  cry  in  terror  for  the  Living 
God.  Up  to  a point  the  natural  Environment 
supplies  man's  wants,  beyond  that  it  only  derides 
him.  How  much  in  man  lies  beyond  that  point } 
Very  much — almost  all,  all  that  makes  man  man. 
The  first  suspicion  of  the  terrible  truth — ^so  for  the 
time  let  us  call  it — wakens  with  the  dawn  of  the 
intellectual  life.  It  is  a solemn  moment  when  the 
slow-moving  mind  reaches  at  length  the  verge  of 
its  mental  horizon,  and,  looking  over,  sees  nothing 
more.  Its  straining  makes  the  abyss  but  more 
profound.  Its  cry  comes  back  without  an  echo. 
Where  is  the  Environment  to  complete  this  rational 
soul Men  either  find  one, — One — or  spend  the  rest 
of  their  days  in  trying  to  shut  their  eyes.  The 
alternatives  of  the  intellectual  life  are  Christianity 
or  Agnosticism.  The  Agnostic  is  right  when  he 
trumpets  his  incompleteness.  He  who  is  not  com- 


ENVIRONMENT. 


m 


plete  in  Him  must  be  for  ever  incomplete.  Still 
more  grave  becomes  man*s  case  when  he  begins 
further  to  explore  his  moral  and  social  nature. 
The  problems  of  the  heart  and  conscience  are  in- 
finitely more  perplexing  than  those  of  the  intellect. 
Has  love  no  future  ? Has  right  no  triumph  ? Is 
the  unfinished  self  to  remain  unfinished  ? Again, 
the  alternatives  are  two,  Christianity  or  Pessimism. 
But  when  we  ascend  the  further  height  of  the 
religious  nature,  the  crisis  comes.  There,  without 
Environment,  the  darkness  is  unutterable.  So  mad- 
dening now  becomes  the  mystery  that  men  are 
compelled  to  construct  an  Environment  for  them- 
selves. No  Environment  here  is  unthinkable.  An 
altar  of  some  sort  men  must  have — God,  or  Nature, 
or  Law.  But  the  anguish  of  Atheism  is  only  a 
negative  proof  of  man’s  incompleteness.  A witness 
more  overwhelming  is  the  prayer  of  the  Christian. 
What  a very  strange  thing,  is  it  not,  for  man  to 
pray  ? It  is  the  symbol  at  once  of  his  littleness 
and  of  his  greatness.  Here  the  sense  of  imperfec- 
tion, controlled  and  silenced  in  the  narrower  reaches 
of  his  being,  becomes  audible.  Now  he  must  utter 
himself.  The  sense  of  need  is  so  real,  and  the  sense 
of  Environment,  that  he  calls  out  to  it,  address* 
ing  it  articulately,  and  imploring  it  to  satisfy  his 
need.  Surely  there  is  nothing  more  touching  ii? 


2^0 


ENVIRONMENT. 


Nature  than  this  ? Man  could  never  so  expose  him- 
self,  so  break  through  all  constraint,  except  from  a 
dire  necessity.  It  is  the  suddenness  and  unpre- 
meditatedness  of  Prayer  that  gives  it  a unique  value 
as  an  apologetic. 

Man  has  three  questions  to  put  to  his  Environ- 
ment, three  symbols  of  his  incompleteness.  They 
come  from  three  different  centres  of  his  being.  The 
first  is  the  question  of  the  intellect,  What  is  Truth  t 
The  natural  Environment  answers,  “ Increase  of 
Knowledge  increaseth  Sorrow/'  and  " much  study 
is  a Weariness.”  Christ  replies,  ‘‘Learn  of  Me,  and 
ye  shall  find  Rest."  Contrast  the  world's  word 
“Weariness”  with  Christ's  word  “Rest.”  No  other 
teacher  since  the  world  began  has  ever  associated 
“ learn  ” with  “ Rest.”  Learn  of  me,  says  the 
philosopher,  and  you  shall  find  Restlessness.  Learn 
of  Me,  says  Christ,  and  ye  shall  find  Rest. 
Thought,  which  the  godless  man  has  cursed,  that 
eternally  starved  yet  ever  living  spectre,  finds  at 
last  its  imperishable  glory ; Thought  is  complete  in 
Him.  The  second  question  is  sent  up  from  the 
moral  nature,  Who  will  show  us  any  good  ? And 
again  we  have  a contrast  : the  world's  verdict, 

“ There  is  none  that  doeth  good,  no,  not  one ; ” 
and  Christ  s,  “ There  is  none  good  but  God  only.'’ 
And,  finally,  there  is  the  lonely  cry  of  the  spirit. 


ENVIRONMENT 


2S1 


most  pathetic  and  most  deep  of  all,  Where  is  he 
whom  my  soul  seeketh  ? And  the  yearning  is  met 
as  before,  ‘‘  I looked  on  my  right  hand,  and  beheld, 
but  there  was  no  man  that  would  know  me ; refuge 
failed  me ; no  man  cared  for  my  soul.  I cried  unto 
Thee,  O Lord : I said.  Thou  art  my  refuge  and  my 
portion  in  the  land  of  the  living.”^ 

Are  these  the  directions  in  which  men  in  these 
days  are  seeking  to  complete  their  lives  ? The 
completion  of  Life  is  just  now  a supreme  question. 
It  is  important  to  observe  how  it  is  being  answered. 
If  we  ask  Science  or  Philosophy  they  will  refer  us 
to  Evolution.  The  struggle  for  Life,  they  assure  us, 
is  steadily  eliminating  imperfect  forms,  and  as  the 
fittest  continue  to  survive  *we  shall  have  a gradual 
perfecting  of  being.  That  is  to  say,  that  completeness 
is  to  be  sought  for  in  the  organism — we  are  to  be 
complete  in  Nature  and  in  ourselves.  To  Evolution, 
certainly,  all  men  will  look  for  a further  perfecting  of 
Life.  But  it  must  be  an  Evolution  which  includes 
all  the  factors.  Civilization,  it  may  be  said,  will  deal 
with  the  second  factor.  It  will  improve  the  Envir- 
onment step  by  step  as  it  improves  the  organism,  or 
the  organism  as  it  improves  the  Environment.  This 
is  well,  and  it  will  perfect  Life  up  to  a point  But 


• Ps.  cxlii.  4,  5. 


282 


ENVIR0NMEN7\ 


beyond  that  it  cannot  carry  us.  As  the  possibil^ 
ties  of  the  natural  Life  become  more  defined,  its 
impossibilities  will  become  the  rpore  appalling.  The 
most  perfect  civilization  would  leave  the  best  part 
of  us  still  incomplete.  Men  will  have  to  give 
up  the  experiment  of  attempting  to  live  in  half  an 
Environment.  Half  an  Environment  will  give  but 
half  a Life.  Half  an  Environment  ? He  whose  cor- 
respondences are  with  this  world  alone  has  only  a 
thousandth  part,  a fraction,  the  mere  rim  and  shade 
of  an  Environment,  and  only  the  fraction  of  a Life^ 
How  long  will  it  take  Science  to  believe  its  own 
creed,  that  the  material  universe  we  see  around  us 
is  only  a fragment  of  the  universe  we  do  i.ot  see  ? 
The  very  retention  of  the  phrase  Material  Uni- 
verse,” we  are  told,  is  the  confession  of  our  unbelief 
and  ignorance ; since  ‘‘  matter  is  the  less  important 
half  of  the  material  of  the  physical  universe.”  ^ 

The  thing  to  be  aimed  at  is  not  an  organism  self- 
contained  and  self-sufficient,  however  high  in  the 
scale  of  being,  but  an  organism  complete  in  the 
whole  Environment.  It  is  open  to  any  one  to  aim  at 
a self-sufficient  Life,  but  he  will  find  no  encourage- 
ment in  Nature.  The  Life  of  the  body  may  complete 
itself  in  the  physical  world ; that  is  its  legitimate 


* The  ‘^Unseen  Universe,” 6th  Ed.,  p.  loo, 


ENVIRONMENT, 


283 


Environment.  The  Life  of  the  senses,  high  and  low, 
may  perfect  itself  in  Nature.  Even  the  Life  of 
thought  may  find  a large  complement  in  surrounding 
things.  But  the  higher  thought,  and  the  conscience^ 
and  the  religious  Life,  can  only  perfect  themselves  in 
God.  To  make  the  influence  of  Environment  stop 
with  the  natural  world  is  to  doom  the  spiritual  nature 
to  death.  For  the  soul,  like  the  body,  can  never 
perfect  itself  in  isolation.  The  law  for  both  is  to  be 
complete  in  the  appropriate  Environment.  And  the 
perfection  to  be  sought  in  the  spiritual  world  is  a 
perfection  of  relation,  a perfect  adjustment  of  that 
which  is  becoming  perfect  to  that  which  is  perfect 
The  third  problem,  now  simplified  to  a point, 
finally  presents  itself.  Where  do  organism  and 
Environment  meet  ? How  does  that  which  is  becom- 
ing perfect  avail  itself  of  its  perfecting  Environment  ? 
And  the  answer  is,  just  as  in  Nature.  The  condition 
is  simple  receptivity.  And  yet  this  is  perhaps  the 
least  simple  of  all  conditions.  It  is  so  simple  that  we 
will  not  act  upon  it.  But  there  is  no  other  condition. 
Christ  has  condensed  the  whole  truth  into  one 
memorable  sentence,  ‘‘As  the  branch  cannot  bear 
fruit  of  itself  except  it  abide  in  the  vine,  no  more  can 
ye  except  ye  abide  in  Me.”  And  on  the  positive 
side,  “ He  that  abideth  in  Me  the  same  bringeth 
forth  much  fruit.” 


CONFORMITY  TO  TYPE 


® * S&  careful  of  the  tyfs  f * but  nOj 

From  scarpM  cliff  and  quarried  stono 
She  cries y ‘ A thousand  types  are  gom^ 
i care  for  nothings  all  shall  go, 

• Thou  makest  thine  appeal  to  me; 

I bring  to  lifey  I bring  to  death  : 

The  spirit  does  but  mean  thy  breath  t 
/ know  no  morel  And  hCy  shall  key 

Many  her  last  worky  who  seenCd  so  fair- 
Such  splendid  purpose  in  his  eyeSy 
Who  rolVd  the  psalm  to  wintry  skiei  , 
Who  built  him  fanes  of  fruitless  prayet^ 

Who  trusted  God  was  love  indeed 
And  love  Creation^ s final  law— 

Thd  Nature,  red  in  tooth  and  claw 
With  ravine,  shriek d against  his  creed-^ 

Who  loved,  who  suffered  countless  ills. 
Who  battled for  the  True,  the  Just, 

Be  blown  about  the  desert  dust 
Or  seal'd  within  the  iron  hills  f ” 


MeWORIAH 


CONFORMITY  TO  TYPE. 


® Until  Christ  be  formed  in  you.” — Paul. 

**  The  one  end  to  which,  in  all  living  beings,  the  formative 
impulse  is  tending — the  one  scheme  which  the  Archaeus  of  the 
old  speculators  strives  to  carry  out,  seems  to  be  to  mould  the 
offspring  into  the  likeness  of  the  parent.  It  is  the  first  great 
law  of  reproduction,  that  the  offspring  tends  to  resemble  its 
parent  or  parents  more  closely  than  anything  else.” — Huxley. 

If  a botanist  be  asked  the  difference  between  an 
oak,  a palm-tree,  and  a lichen,  he  will  declare  that 
they  are  separated  from  one  another  by  the  broadest 
line  known  to  classification.  Without  taking  into 
account  the  outward  differences  of  size  and  form,  the 
variety  of  flower  and  fruit,  the  peculiarities  of  leaf 
and  branch,  he  sees  even  in  their  general  architecture 
types  of  structure  as  distinct  as  Norman,  Gothic  and 
Egyptian  But  if  the  first  young  germs  of  these 
three  plants  are  placed  before  him  and  he  is  called 
upon  to  define  the  difference,  he  finds  it  impossible. 
He  cannot  even  say  which  is  which.  Examined 
under  the  highest  powers  of  the  microscope  they 


288 


CONFORMITY  TO  TYPE, 


yield  no  clue.  Analysed  by  the  chemist  with  all  the 
appliances  of  his  laboratory  they  keep  their  secret. 

The  same  . experiment  can  be  tried  witfi  the 
embryos  of  animals.  Take  the  ovule  of  the  worm, 
the  eagle,  the  elephant,  and  of  man  himself  Let  the 
most  skilled  observer  apply  the  most  searching  tests 
to  distinguish  one  from  the  other  and  he  will  fail. 
But  there  is  something  more  surprising  still.  Com- 
pare next  the  two  sets  of  germs,  the  vegetable  and 
the  animal.  And  there  is  still  no  shade  of  difference. 
Oak  and  palm,  worm  and  man  all  start  in  life 
together.  No  matter  into  what  strangely  different 
forms  they  may  afterwards  develop,  no  matter 
whether  they  are  to  live  on  sea  or  land,  creep  or  fly, 
swim  or  walk,  think  or  vegetate,  in  the  embryo  as  it 
first  meets  the  eye  of  Science  they  are  indistinguish- 
able. The  apple  which  fell  in  Newton’s  Garden, 
Newton’s  dog  Diamond,  and  Newton  himself,  began 
life  at  the  same  point.^ 

* “ There  is,  indeed,  a period  in  the  development  of  every 
tissue  and  every  living  thing  known  to  us  when  there  are 
actually  no  structural  peculiarities  whatever — when  the  whole 
organism  consists  of  transparent,  structureless,  semi-fluid  living 
bioplasm — when  it  would  not  be  possible  to  distinguish  the 
growing  moving  matter  which  was  to  evolve  the  oak  from  that 
which  was  the  germ  of  a vertebrate  animal.  Nor  can  any 
difference  be  discerned  between  the  bioplasm  matter  of  the 
lowest,  simplest,  epithelial  scale  of  man’s  organism  and  that 
from  which  the  nerve  ceils  of  his  brain  are  to  be  evolved 


CONFORMITY  TO  TYPE. 


2»9 


If  we  analyse  this  material  point  at  which  all  life 
starts,  we  shall  find  it  to  consist  of  a clear  structure 
less  jelly-like  substance  resembling  albumen  or  white 
of  egg.  It  is  made  of  Carbon,  Hydrogen,  Oxygen 
and  Nitrogen.  Its  name  is  protoplasm.  And  it  is 
not  only  the  structural  unit  with  which  all  living 
bodies  start  in  life,  but  with  which  they  are  sub- 
sequently built  up.  “ Protoplasm,”  says  Huxley, 
simple  or  nucleated,  is  the  formal  basis  of  all  life. 
It  is  the  clay  of  the  Potter.”  ''  Beast  and  fowl, 
reptile  and  fish,  mollusk,  worm  and  polype  are  all 
composed  of  structural  units  of  the  same  character, 
namely,  masses  of  protoplasm  with  a nucleus.”  ^ 

What  then  determines  the  difference  between 
different  animals  ? What  makes  one  little  speck  of 
.protoplasm  grow  into  Newton's  dog  Diamond,  and 
another,  exactly  the  same,  into  Newton  himself.?  It 
is  a mysterious  something  which  has  entered  into 
this  protoplasm.  No  eye  can^see  it.  No  science 
can  define  it.  There  is  a different  something  for 
Newton's  dog  and  a different  something  for  New 
ton  ; so  that  though  both  use  the  same  matter  they 

N either  by  studying  bioplasm  under  the  microscope  nor  by  any 
kind  of  physical  or  chemical  investigation  known,  can  we  form 
any  notion  of  the  nature  of  the  substance  which  is  to  be  formed 
by  the  bioplasm,  or  what  will  be  the  ordinary  results  of  the 
living.” — “Bioplasm,”  Lionel  S.  Beale,  F.R.S.,  pp.  17,  18. 

* Huxley;  “Lay  Sermons,”  6th  Ed.,  pp,  127,  129. 

U 


290 


CONFORMITY  TO  TYPE. 


build  it  up  in  these  widely  difTerent  ways.  Proto 
plaism  being  the  clay,  this  something  is  the  Potter. 
And  as  there  is  only  one  clay  and  yet  all  these 
curious  forms  are  developed  out  of  it,  it  follows 
necessarily  that  the  difference  lies  in  the  potters. 
There  must  in  short  be  as  many  potters  as  there  are 
forms.  There  is  the  potter  who  segments  the  worm, 
and  the  potter  who  builds  up  the  form  of  the  dog, 
and  the  potter  who  moulds  the  man.  To  under- 
stand unmistakably  that  it  is  really  the  potter  who 
does  the  work,  let  us  follow  for  a moment  a descrip- 
tion of  the  process  by  a trained  eye-witness.  The 
observer  is  Mr.  Huxley.  Through  the  tube  of  his 
microscope  he  is  watching  the  development,  out  of 
a speck  of  protoplasm,  of  one  of  the  commonest 
animals : “ Strange  possibilities,*'  he  says,  ‘‘  lie  dor- 
mant in  that  semi-fluid  globule.  Let  a moderate  sup- 
ply of  warmth  reach  its  watery  cradle  and  the  plastic 
matter  undergoes  changes  so  rapid  and  yet  so  steady 
and  purposelike  in  their  succession  that  one  can  only 
compare  them  to  those  operated  by  a skilled  model- 
ler upon  a formless  lump  of  clay.  As  with  an  invis- 
ible trowel  the  mass  is  divided  and  subdivided  into 
smaller  and  smaller  portions,  until  it  is  reduced  to  an 
aggregation  of  granules  not  too  large  to  build  withal 
the  finest  fabrics  of  the  nascent  organism.  And, 
then,  it  is  as  if  a delicate  finger  traced  out  the  line  to 


CONFOimiTY  TO  TYPE. 


291 


be  occupied  by  the  spinal  column,  and  moulded  the 
contour  of  the  body ; pinching  up  the  head  at  one 
end,  the  tail  at  the  other,  and  fashioning  flank  and 
,limb  into  due  proportions  in  so  artistic  a way,  that, 
after  watching  the  process  hour  by  hour,  one  is 
almost  involuntarily  possessed  by  the  notion,  that 
some  more  subtle  aid  to  vision  than  an  achromatic 
would  show  the  hidden  artist,  with  his  plan  before 
him,  striving  with  skilful  manipulation  to  perfect  his 
work.”^ 

Besides  the  fact,  so  luminously  brought  out  here, 
that  the  artist  is  distinct  from  the  semi-fluid 
globule  ” of  protoplasm  in  which  he  works,  there  is 
this  other  essential  point  to  notice,  that  in  all  his 
‘‘skilful  manipulation*’  the  artist  is  not  working  at 
random,  but  according  to  law.  He  has  “his  plan 
before  him.”  In  the  zoological  laboratoiy  of  Nature 
it  is  not  as  in  a workshop  where  a skilled  artisan  can 
turn  his  hand  to  anything — where  the  same  potter 
one  day  moulds  a dog,  the  next  a bird,  and  the  next 
a man.  In  Nature  one  potter  is  set  apart  to  make 
each.  It  is  a more  complete  system  of  division  of 
labour.  One  artist  makes  all  the  dogs,  another 
makes  all  the  birds,  a third  makes  all  the  men. 
Moreover,  each  artist  confines  himself  exclusively 
to  working  out  his  own  plan.  He  appears  to  have 
‘ Huxleys  “Lay  Sermons,'^  6th  Ed.,  p.  261. 


*92  CONFORMITY  TO  TYPE, 

his  own  plan  somehow  stamped  upon  himself,  and 
his  work  is  rigidly  to  reproduce  himself. 

The  Scientific  Law  by  which  this  takes  place  is  the 
Law  of  Conformity  to  Type.  It  is  contained,  to  a large 
extent,  in  the  ordinary  Law  of  Inheritance ; or  it 
may  be  considered  as  simply  another  way  of  stating 
what  Darwin  calls  the  Law  of  Unity  of  Type.  Dar- 
win defines  it  thus:  ‘‘By  Unity  of  Type  is  meant 
that  fundamental  agreement  in  structure  which  we 
see  in  organic  beings  of  the  same  class,  and  which  is 
quite  independent  of  their  habits  of  life.”  ^ Accord- 
ing to  this  law  every  living  thing  that  comes  into  the 
world  is  compelled  to  stamp  upon  its  offspring  the 
image  of  itself.  The  dog,  according  to  its  type, 
produces  a dog  ; the  bird  a bird. 

The  Artist  who  operates  upon  matter  in  this  subtle 
way  and  carries  out  this  law  is  Life.  There  are  a 
great  many  different  kinds  of  Life.  If  one  might  give 
the  broader  meaning  to  the  words  of  the  apostle : 
“ All  life  is  not  the  same  life.  There  is  one  kind  of 
life  of  men,  another  life  of  beasts,  another  of  fishes, 
and  another  of  birds.”  There  is  the  Life,  or  the  Artist, 
or  the  Potter  who  segments  the  worm,  the  potter  who 
foi  ms  the  dog,  the  potter  who  moulds  the  man.* 

* “ Origin  of  Species,  p.  i66. 

• There  is  no  intention  here  to  countenance  the  old  doctrine 
of  the  permanence  of  species.  Whether  the  word  specici 


CONFORMITY  TO  TYPE, 


293 


What  goes  on  then  in  the  animal  kingdom  is  this— 
the  Bird-Life  seizes  upon  the  bird-germ  and  builds  it 
up  into  a bird,  the  image  of  itself.  The  Reptile-Life 
seizes  upon  another  germinal  speck,  assimilates  sur- 
rounding matter,  and  fashions  it  into  a reptile.  The 
Reptile-Life  thus  simply  makes  an  incarnation  of 
itself.  The  visible  bird  is  simply  an  incarnation  of 
the  invisible  Bird-Life. 

Now  we  are  nearing  the  point  where  the  spiritual 
analogy  appears.  It  is  a very  wonderful  analogy,  so 
wonderful  that  one  almost  hesitates  to  put  it  into 
words.  Yet  Nature  is  reverent ; and  it  is  her  voice 
to  which  we  listen.  These  lower  phenomena  of  life, 
she  says,  are  but  an  allegory.  There  is  another  kind 
of  Life  of  which  Science  as  yet  has  taken  little 
cognisance.  It  obeys  the  same  laws.  It  builds  up 
an  organism  into  its  own  form.  It  is  the  Christ-Life. 
As  the  Bird-Life  builds  up  a bird,  the  image  of  itself, 
so  the  Christ-Life  builds  up  a Christ,  the  image  of 
Himself,  in  the  inward  nature  of  man.  When  a man 

represent  a fixed  quantity  or  the  reverse  does  not  affect  the 
question.  The  facts  as  stated  are  true  in  contemporary  zoology 
if  not  in  palaeontology.  It  may  also  be  added  that  the  general 
conception  of  a definite  Vital  Principle  is  used  here  simply  as  a 
working  hypothesis.  Science  may  yet  have  to  give  up  what  the 
Germans  call  the  “ontogenetic  directive  Force.”  But  in  the 
absence  of  any  proof  to  the  contrary,  and  especially  of  any 
satisfactory  alternative,  we  are  justified  in  working  still  witlk  th« 
oii  theory. 


CONFORMITY  TO  TYPE. 


294 

becomes  a Christian  the  natural  process  is  this : The 
Living  Christ  enters  into  his  soul.  Development 
begins.  The  quickening  Life  seizes  upon  the  soul, 
assimilates  surrounding  elements,  and  begins  to 
fashion  it  According  to  the  great  Law  of  Con- 
formity to  Type  this  fashioning  takes  a specific  form. 
It  is  that  of  the  Artist  who  fashions.  And  all 
through  Life  this  wonderful,  mystical,  glorious,  yet 
perfectly  definite  process,  goes  on  until  Christ  be 
formed  in  it 

The  Christian  Life  is  not  a vague  effort  after 
righteousness — an  ill-defined  pointless  struggle  for 
an  ill-defined  pointless  end.  Religion  is  no  dis- 
hevelled mass  of  aspiration,  prayer,  and  faith.  There 
is  no  more  mystery  in  Religion  as  to  its  processes 
than  in  Biology,  There  is  much  mystery  in  Biology. 
We  know  all  but  nothing  of  Life  yet,  nothing  of 
development  There  is  the  same  mystery  in  the 
spiritual  Life.  But  the  great  lines  are  the  same,  as 
decided,  as  luminous ; and  the  laws  of  natural  and 
spiritual  are  the  same,  as  unerring,  as  simple.  Will 
everything  else  in  the  natural  world  unfold  its  order, 
and  yield  to  Science  more  and  more  a vision  of  har- 
mon35<  and  Religion,  which  should  complement  and 
perfect  all,  remain  a chaos  } From  the  standpoint  of 
Revelation  no  truth  is  more  obscure  than  Conformity 
to  Type.  If  Science  can  furnish  a companion  pheno- 


CONFORMITY  TO  TYPE. 


295 


menon  from  an  every-day  process  of  the  natural  life, 
it  may  at  least  throw  this  most  mystical  doctrine  of 
Christianity  into  thinkable  form.  Is  there  any  fallacy 
in  speaking  of  the  Embryology  of  the  New  Life? 
Is  the  analogy  invalid  ? Are  there  not  vital  processes 
in  the  Spiritual  as  well  as  in  the  Natural  world  ? 
The  Bird  • being  an  incarnation  of  the  Bird-Life, 
may  not  the  Christian  be  a spiritual  incarnation  of 
the  Christ-Life?  And  is  there  not  a real  justification 
in  the  processes  of  the  New  Birth  for  such  a parallel  ? 

Let  us  appeal  to  the  record  of  these  processes. 

In  what  terms  does  the  New  Testament  describe 
them  ? The  answer  is  sufficiently  striking.  It  uses 
everywhere  the  language  of  Biology.  It  is  im- 
possible that  the  New  Testament  writers  should 
have  been  familiar  with  these  biological  facts.  It  is 
impossible  that  their  views  of  this  great  truth  should 
have  been  as  clear  as  Science  can  make  them  now. 
But  they  had  no  alternative.  There  was  no  other 
way  of  expressing  this  truth.  It  was  a biological 
question.  So  they  struck  out  unhesitatingly  into  the 
new  field  of  words,  and,  with  an  originality  which 
commands  both  reverence  and  surprise,  stated  their 
truth  with  such  light,  or  darkness,  as  they  had. 
They  did  not  mean  to  be  scientific,  only  to  be 
accurate,  and  their  fearless  accuracy  has  made  them 
scientific. 


CONFORMITY  TO  TYPE. 


296 

What  could  be  more  original,  for  instance,  than  the 
Apostle’s  reiteration  that  the  Christian  was  a new 
creature,  a new  man,  a babe  ? ^ Or  that  this  new 
man  was  begotten  of  God,”  God’s  workmanship  ? * 
And  what  could  be  a more  accurate  expression  of  the 
law  of  Conformity  to  Type  than  this  : Put  on  the 

new  man,  which  is  renewed  in  knowledge  after  the 
image  of  Him  that  created  him  ”?  ^ Or  this,  ‘'We  are 
changed  into  the  same  image  from  glory  to  glory  ” ? ^ 
And  elsewhere  we  are  expressly  told  by  the  same 
writer  that  this  Conformity  is  the  end  and  goal  of  the 
Christian  life.  To  work  this  Type  in  us  is  the  whole 
purpose  of  God  for  man.  “ Whom  He  did  foreknow 
He  also  did  predestinate  to  be  conformed  to  the 
image  of  His  Son.”  ® 

One  must  confess  that  the  originality  of  this  entire 
New  Testament  conception  is  most  startling.  Even 
for  the  nineteenth  century  it  is  most  startling.  But 
when  one  remembers  that  such  an  idea  took  form  in 
the  first,  he  cannot  fail  to  be  impressed  with  a deep- 
ening wonder  at  the  system  which  begat  and  cher- 
ished it.  Men  seek  the  origin  of  Christianity  among 
the  philosophies  of  that  age.  Scholars  contrast  it 
still  with  these  philosophies,  and  scheme  to  fit  it  in 

‘ 1 Cor.  V.  17.  * 1 John  v.  18  ; i Pet.  L j 

• Col.  iii.  9,  la  ^2  Cor.  iii.  18 

• Rom.  viii.  29. 


CONFORMITY  TO  TYPE. 


297 


to  those  of  later  growth.  Has  it  never  occurred  to 
them  how  much  more  it  is  than  a philosophy,  that 
it  includes  a science^  a Biology  pure  and  simple  ? 
As  well  might  naturalists  contrast  zoology  with 
chemistry,  or  seek  to  incorporate  geology  with 
botany — the  living  with  the  dead — as  try  to  explain 
the  spiritual  life  in  terms  of  mind  alone.  When 
will  it  be  seen  that  the  characteristic  of  the  Chris- 
tian Religion  is  its  Life,  that  a true  theology  must 
begin  with  a Biology  ? Theology  is  the  Science  of 
God.  Why  will  men  treat  God  as  inorganic  ? 

If  this  analogy  is  capable  of  being  worked  out,  we 
should  expect  answers  to  at  least  three  questions. 

First : What  corresponds  to  the  protoplasm  in  the 
spiritual  sphere  ? 

Second  : What  is  the  Life,  the  Hidden  Artist  who 
fashions  it  ? 

Third : What  do  we  know  of  the  process  and  the 
plan  i 

First : The  Protoplasm. 

We  should  be  forsaking  the  lines  of  nature  were 
we  to  imagine  for  a moment  that  the  new  creature 
was  to  be  formed  out  of  nothing.  Ex  nikilo  nihil — 
nothing  can  be  made  out  of  nothing.  Matter  is  un- 
creatable  and  indestructible;  Nature  and  man  can 
only  form  and  transform.  Hence  when  a new  animal 
is  made,  no  new  clay  is  madd  Life  merely  enters 


CONFORMITY  TO  TYPE, 


loF 

into  already  existing  matter,  assimilates  more  of  the 
same  sort  and  re-builds  it.  The  spiritual  Artist 
w'orks  in  the  same  way.  He  must  have  a peculiar 
kind  of  protoplasm,  a basis  of  life,  and  that  must  be 
already  existing. 

Now  He  finds  this  in  the  materials  of  character 
with  which  the  natural  man  is  previously  provided. 
Mind  and  character,  the  will  and  the  affections,  the 
moral  nature — these  form  the  bases  of  spiritual  life. 
To  look  in  this  direction  for  the  protoplasm  of  the 
spiritual  life  is  consistent  with  all  analogy.  The 
lowest  or  mineral  world  mainly  supplies  the  material 
— and  this  is  true  even  for  insectivorous  species — for 
the  vegetable  kingdom.  The  vegetable  supplies  the 
material  for  the  animal.  Next  in  turn,  the  animal 
furnishes  material  for  the  mental,  and  lastly,  the 
mental  for  the  spiritual.  Each  member  of  the  series 
is  complete  only  when  the  steps  below  it  are  com- 
plete ; the  highest  demands  all.  It  is  not  necessary 
for  the  immediate  purpose  to  go  so  far  into  the  psy- 
chology either  of  the  new  creature  or  of  the  old  as  to 
define  more  clearly  what  these  moral  bases  are.  It 
is  enough  to  discover  that  in  this  womb  the  new 
creature  is  to  be  born,  fashioned  out  of  the  mental 
and  moral  parts,  substance,  or  essence  of  the  natural 
man.  The  only  thing  to  be  insisted  upon  is  that  in 
the  natural  man  this  mental  and  moral  substance  oi 


CONFORMITY  TO  TYPE, 


299 


basis  Is  spiritually  lifeless.  However  active  the  intel« 
lectual  or  moral  life  may  be,  from  the  point  of  view 
of  this  other  Life  it  is  dead.  That  which  is  flesh  is 
flesh.  It  wants,  that  is  to  say,  the  kind  of  Life  which 
constitutes  the  difference  between  the  Christian  and 
the  not-a-Christian.  It  has  not  yet  been  “ born  ol 
the  Spirit.” 

. To  show  further  that  this  protoplasm  possesses  the 
necessary  properties  of  a normal  protoplasm  it  will 
be  necessary  to  examine  in  passing  what  these  pro- 
perties are.  They  are  two  in  number,  the  capacity 
for  life  and  plasticity.  Consider  first  the  capacity 
for  life.  It  is  not  enough  to  find  an  adequate  supply 
of  material.  That  material  must  be  of  the  right 
kind.  For  all  kinds  of  ^matter  have  not  the  power  to 
be  the  vehicle  of  life — all  kinds  of  matter  are  not 
even  fitted  to  be  the  vehicle  of  electricity.  What 
peculiarity  there  is  in  Carbon,  Hydrogen,  Oxygen, 
and  Nitrogen,  when  combined  in  a certain  way,  to 
receive  life,  we  cannot  tell.  We  only  know  that  life 
is  always  associated  in  Nature  with  this  particulat 
physical  basis  and  never  with  any  other.  But  we  are 
not  in  the  same  darkness  with  regard  to  the  moral 
protoplasm.  When  we  look  at  this  complex  com- 
bination which  we  have  predicated  as  the  basis  oi 
spiritual  life,  we  do  find  something  which  gives  it  a 
peculiar  qualification  for  being  the  protoplasm  of  the 


300 


CONFORMITY  TO  TYPE, 


Christ-Life.  We  discover  one  strong  reason  at  least, 
not  only  why  this  kind  of  life  should  be  associated 
with  this  kind  of  protoplasm,  but  why  it  should  never 
be  associated  with  other  kinds  which  seem  to 
resemble  it — why,  for  instance,  this  spiritual  life 
should  not  be  engrafted  upon  the  intelligence  oi 
a dog  or  the  instincts  of  an  ant. 

The  protoplasm  in  man  has  a something  in  ad- 
dition to  its  instincts  or  its  habits.  It  has  a 
capacity  for  God.  In  this  capacity  for  God  lies 
its  receptivity;  it  is  the  very  protoplasm  that  was 
necessary.  The  chamber  is  not  only  ready  to 
receive  the  new  Life,  but  the  Guest  is  expected, 
and,  till  He  comes,  is  missed.  Till  then  the  soul 
longs  and  yearns,  wastes  and  pines,  waving  its 
tentacles  piteously  in  the  empty  air,  feeling  after  God 
if  so  be  that  it  may  find  Him.  This  is  not  peculiar 
to  the  protoplasm  of  the  Christian’s  soul.  In  every 
land  and  in  every  age  there  have  been  altars  to  the 
Known  or  Unknown  God.  It  is  now  agreed  as  a 
mere  question  of  anthropology  that  the  universal 
language  of  the  human  soul  has  always  been  I 
perish  with  hunger.”  This  is  what  fits  it  for  Christ 
There  is  a grandeur  in  this  cry  from  the  depths  which 
makes  its  very  unhappiness  sublime. 

The  other  quality  we  are  to  look  for  in  the  soul  is 
mould  ableness,  plasticity.  Conformity  demands  con- 


CONFORMITY  TO  TYPE. 


301 


formability.  Now  plasticity  is  not  only  a marked 
characteristic  of  all  forms  of  life,  but  in  a special 
sense  of  the  highest  forms.  It  increases  steadily  as 
we  rise  in  the  scale.  The  inorganic  world,  to  begin 
with,  is  rigid.  A crystal  of  silica  dissolved  and  re- 
dissolved a thousand  times  v/ill  never  assume  any 
other  form  than  the  hexagonal.  The  plant  next, 
though  plastic  in  its  elements,  is  comparatively  insus- 
ceptible of  change.  The  very  fixity  of  its  sphere, 
the  imprisonment  for  life  in  a single  spot  of  earth,  is 
the  symbol  of  a certain  degradation.  The  animal  in 
all  its  parts -is  mobile,  sensitive,  free;  the  highest 
animal,  man,  is  the  most  mobile,  the  most  at  leisure 
from  routine,  the  most  impressionable,  the  most  open 
for  change.  And  when  we  reach  the  mind  and  soul, 
this  mobility  is  found  in  its  most  developed  form. 
Whether  we  regard  its  susceptibility  to  impressions, 
its  lightning-like  response  even  to  influences  the  most 
impalpable  and  subtle,  its  power  of  instantaneous 
adjustment,  or  whether  we  regard  the  delicacy  and 
variety  of  its  moods,  or  its  vast  powers  of  growth,  we 
are  forced  to  recognise  in  this  the  most  perfect 
capacity  for  change.  This  marvellous  plasticity  of 
mind  contains  at  once  the  possibility  and  prophecy  of 
its  transformation.  The  soul,  in  a word,  is  made  tc 
be  converted. 


302 


CONFORMITY  TO  TYPE. 


Second,  The  Life. 

The  main  reason  for  giving  the  Life,  the  agent  of 
this  change,  a separate  treatment,  is  to  emphasize 
the  distinction  between  it  and  the  natural  man  on  the 
one  hand,  and  the  spiritual  man  on  the  other.  The 
natural  man  is  its  basis,  the  spiritual  man  is  its 
product,  the  Life  itself  is  something  different  Just 
as  in  an  organism  we  have  these  three  things — 
formative  matter,  formed  matter,  and  the  forming 
principle  or  life ; so  in  the  soul  we  have  the  old 
nature,  the  renewed  nature,  and  the  transforming 
Life. 

This  being  made  evident,  little  remains  here  to 
be  added.  No  man  has  ever  seen  this  Life.  It 
cannot  be  analysed,  or  weighed,  or  traced  in  its 
essential  nature.  But  this  is  just  what  we  expected. 
This  invisibility  is  the  same  property  which  we  found 
to  be  peculiar  to  the  natural  life.  We  saw  no  life  in 
the  first  embryos,  in  oak,  in  palm,  or  in  bird.  In  the 
adult  it  likewise  escapes  us.  We  shall  not  wonder 
if  we  cannot  see  it  in  the  Christian.  We  shall  not 
expect  to  see  it.  A fortiori  we  shall  not  expect  to 
see  it,  for  we  are  further  removed  from  the  coarser 
matter — moving  now  among  ethereal  and  spiritual 
things.  It  is  because  it  conforms  to  the  law  of  this 
analogy  so  well  that  men,  not  seeing  it,  have  denied 
its  being.  Is  it  hopeless  to  point  out  that  one  of  the 


CONFORMITY  TO  TYPE, 


303 


most  recognisable  characteristics  of  life  is  its  un- 
recognisableness, and  that  the  very  token  of  its 
spiritual  nature  lies  in  its  being  beyond  the  grossness 
of  our  eyes  ? 

We  do  not  pretend  that  Science  can  define  this 
Life  to  be  Christ.  It  has  no  definition  to  give  even 
of  its  own  life,  much  less  of  this.  But  there  are 
converging  lines  which  point,  at  least,  in  the  direction 
that  it  is  Christ.  There  was  One  whom  history 
acknowledges  to  have  been  the  Truth.  One  of  His 
claims  was  this,  I am  the  Life.*’  According  to  the 
doctrine  of  Biogenesis,  life  can  only  come  from  life. 
It  was  His  additional  claim  that  His  function  in  the 
world  was  to  give  men  Life.  ‘‘  I am  come  that  ye 
might  have  Life,  and  that  ye  might  have  it  more 
abundantly.”  This  could  not  refer  to  the  natural 
life,  for  men  had  that  already.  He  that  hath  the  Son 
hath  another  Life.  " Know  ye  not  your  own  selves 
how  that  Jesus  Christ  is  in  you.” 

Again,  there  are  men  whose  characters  assume  a 
strange  resemblance  to  Him  who  was  the  Life. 
When  we  see  the  bird-character  appear  in  an  organ- 
ism we  assume  that  the  Bird-Life  has  been  there  at 
work.  And  when  we  behold  Conformity  to  Type 
in  a Christian,  and  know  moreover  that  the  type- 
organization  can  be  produced  by  the  type-life  alone 
does  this  not  lend  support  to  the  hypothesis  that  the 


304 


CONFORMITY  TO  TYPE. 


Type-Life  also  has  been  here  at  work  ? If  every 
effect  demands  a cause,  what  other  cause  is  there  for 
the  Christian?  When  we  have  a cause,  and  an 
adequate  cause,  and  no  other  adequate  cause ; when 
we  have  the  express  statement  of  that  Cause  that 
he  is  that  cause,  what  more  is  possible  ? Let  not 
Science,  knowing  nothing  of  its  own  life,  go  further 
than  to  say  it  knows  nothing  of  this  Life.  We  shall 
not  dissent  from  its  silence.  But  till  it  tells  us  what 
it  is,  we  wait  for  evidence  that  it  is  not  this. 

Third,  the  Process. 

It  is  impossible  to  enter  at  length  into  any  details 
of  the  great  miracle  by  which  this  protoplasm  is  to 
be  conformed  to  the  Image  of  the  Son.  We  enter 
that  province  now  only  so  far  as  this  Law  of  Con- 
formity compels  us.  Nor  is  it  so  much  the  nature 
of  the  process  we  have  to  consider  as  its  general 
direction  and  results.  We  are  dealing  with  a ques- 
tion of  morphology  rather  than  of  physiology. 

It  must  occur  to  one  on  reaching  this  point,  that 
a new  element  Here  comes  in  which  compels  us,  for 
the  moment,  to  part  company  with  zoology.  That 
ehment  is  the  conscious  power  of  choice.  The 
animal  in  following  the  type  is  blind.  It  does  not 
only  follow  the  ^type  involuntarily  and  compulsorily, 
but  does  not  know  that  it  is  following  it  We  might 
certainly  have  been  made  to  conform  to  the  Type 


CONFORMITY  TO  TYPE, 


305 


in  the  higher  sphere  with  no  more  knowledge  ot 
power  of  choice  than  animals  or  automata.  But 
flien  we  should  not  have  been  men.  It  is  a possible 
case,  but  not  possible  to  the  kind  of  protoplasm  wuth 
which  men  are  furnished.  Owing  to  the  peculiar 
characteristics  of  this  protoplasm  an  additional  and 
exceptional  provision  is  essential. 

The  first  demand  is  that  being  conscious  and 
having  this  power  of  choice,  the  mind  should  have 
an  adequate  knowledge  of  what  it  is  to  choose. 
Some  revelation  of  the  Type,  that  is  to  say,  is  ne- 
cessary. And  as  that  revelation  can  only  come  from 
the  Type,  we  must  look  there  for  it. 

We  are  confronted  at  once  with  the  Incarnation. 
There  we  find  how  the  Christ-Life  has  clothed 
Himself  with  matter,  taken  literal  flesh,  and  dwelt 
among  us.  The  Incarnation  is  the  Life  revealing  the 
Type.  Men  are  long  since  agreed  that  this  is  the 
end  of  the  Incarnation — the  revealing  of  God.  But 
why  should  God  be  revealed  i Why,  indeed,  but  for 
man  ? Why  but  that  “ beholding  as  in  a glass  the 
glory  of  the  only  begotten  we  should  be  changed 
into  the  same  Image  ” ? 

To  meet  the  power  of  choice,  however,  something 
more  was  necessary  than  the  mere  revelation  of  the 
Type — it  was  necessary  that  the  Type  should  be  the 
highest  conceivable  Type.  In  other  words,  the  Type 


X 


3o6 


CONFORMITY  TO  TYPE. 


must  be  an  Ideal  For  all  true  human  growth, 
effort,  and  achievement,  an  ideal  is  acknowledged  to 
be  indispensable.  And  all  men  accordingly  whose 
lives  are  based  on  principle,  have  set  themselves  an 
ideal,  more  or  less  perfect.  It  is  this  which  first 
deflects  the  will  from  what  is  base,  and  turns  the 
wayward  life  to  what  is  holy.  So  much  is  true  as 
mere  philosophy.  But  philosophy  failed  to  present 
men  with  their  ideal  It  has  never  been  suggested 
that  Christianity  has  failed.  Believers  and  unbe- 
lievers have  been  compelled  to  acknowledge  that 
Christianity  holds  up  to  the  world  the  missing  Type, 
the  Perfect  Man. 

The  recognition  of  the  Ideal  is  the  first  step  in  the 
direction  of  Conformity.  But  let  it  be  clearly  ob- 
served that  it  is  but  a step.  There  is  no  vital 
connection  between  merely  seeing  the  Ideal  and 
being  conformed  to  it.  Thousands  admire  Chriit 
who  never  become  Christians. 

But  the  great  question  still  remains.  How  is  the 
Christian  to  be  conformed  to  the  Type,  or  as  we 
should  now  say,  dealing  with  consciousness,  to  the 
Ideal  ? The  mere  knowledge  of  the  Ideal  is  no  more 
than  a motive.  How  is  the  process  to  be  practically 
accomplished } Who  is  to  do  it  ? Where,  when, 
how  ? This  is  the  test  question  of  Christianity.  It 
is  here  that  all  theories  of  Christianity,  all  attempts 


CONFORMITY  TO  TYPE.  307 

to  explain  it  on  natural  principles,  all  reductions  of 
it  to  philosophy,  inevitably  break  down.  It  is  here 
that  all  imitations  of  Christianity  perish.  It  is  here, 
also,  that  personal  religion  finds  its  most  fatal  ob- 
stacle. Men  are  all  quite  clear  about  the  Ideal.  We 
are  all  convinced  of  the  duty  of  mankind  regarding 
it  But  how  to  secure  that  willing  men  shall  attain 
it — that  is  the  problem  of  religion.  It  is  the  failure 
to  understand  the  dynamics  of  Christianity  that  has 
most  seriously  and  most  pitifully  hindered  its  growth 
both  in  the  individual  and  in  the  race. 

From  the  standpoint  of  biology  this  practical 
difficulty  vanishes  in  a moment.  It  is  probably  the 
very  simplicity  of  the  law  regarding  it  that  has 
made  men  stumble.  For  nothing  is  so  invisible  to 
most  men  as  transparency.  The  law  here  is  the 
same  biological  law  that  exists  in  the  natural  world. 
For  centuries  men  have  striven  to  find  out  ways 
and  means  to  conform  themselves  to  this  type. 
Impressive  motives  have  been  pictured,  the  proper 
circumstances  arranged,  the  direction  of  effort  de- 
fined, and  men  have  toiled,  struggled,  and  agonized 
to  conform  themselves  to  the  Image  of  the  Son. 
Can  the  protoplasm  conform  itself  to  its  type  ? 
Can  the  embryo  fashion  itself ‘I  Is  Conformity  to 
Type  produced  by  the  matter  or  by  the  life^  by 
the  protoplasm  or  by  the  Type  ? Is  organization 


3o8 


CONFORMITY  TO  TYPE. 


the  cause  of  life  or  the  effect  of  it  ? It  is  the 
effect  of  it.  Conformity  to  Type,  therefore,  is  secured 
by  the  type.  Christ  makes  the  Christian. 

Men  need  only  reflect  on  the  automatic  processes 
of  their  natural  body  to  discover  that  this  is  the 
universal  law  of  Life.  What  does  any  man  con- 
sciously do,  for  instance,  in  the  matter  of  breathing  ? 
What  part  does  he  take  in  circuiating  the  biood,  in 
keeping  up  the  rhythm  of  his  heart  ? What  control 
has  he  over  growth  ? What  man  by  taking  thouglit 
can  add  a cubit  to  his  stature  ? What  part  volun- 
tarily does  man  take  in  secretion,  in  digestion,  in 
the  reflex  actions  ? In  point  of  fact  is  he  not 
after  all  the  veriest  automaton,  every  organ  of  his 
body  given  him,  every  function  arranged  for  ffim, 
brain  and  nerve,  thought  and  sensation,  will  and 
conscience,  all  provided  for  him  ready  made  .?  And 
yet  he  turns  upon  his  soul  and  wishes  to  organize 
that  himself!  O preposterous  and  vain  man,  thou 
who  couldest  not  make  a finger  nail  of  thy  body, 
thinkest  thou  to  fashion  this  wonderful,  myste- 
rious, subtle  soul  of  thine  after  the  ineffable  Image  ? 
Wilt  thou  ever  permit  thyself  la  be  conformed  to 
the  Image  of  the  Son  ? Wilt  thou,  who  canst  not 
add  a cubit  to  thy  stature,  submit  to  be  raised  by 
the  Type-Life  within  thee  to  the  perfect  stature  ol 
Christ  ? 


CONFORMITY  TO  TYPE. 


309 


This  is  a humbling  conclusion.  And  therefore 
men  will  resent  it  Men  will  still  experiment  by 
works  of  righteousness  which  they  have  done’*  to 
earn  the  Ideal  life.  The  doctrine  of  Human  In- 
ability, as  the  Church  calls  it,  has  always  been 
objectionable  to  men  who  do  not  know  themselves. 
The  doctrine  itself,  perhaps,  has  been  partly  to 
blame.  While  it  has  been  often  affirmed  in  such 
anguage  as  rightly  to  humble  men,  it  has  also 
been  stated  and  cast  in  their  teeth  with  words 
which  could  only  insult  them.  Merely  to  assert 
dogmatically  that  man  has  no  power  to  move  hand 
or  foot  to  help  himself  towards  Christ,  carries  no 
real  conviction.  The  weight  of  human  authority  is 
always  powerless,  and  ought  to  be,  where  the  in- 
telligence is  denied  a rationale.  In  the  light  of 
modern  science  when  men  seek  a reason  for  every 
thought  of  God  or  man,  this  old  doctrine  with  its 
severe  and  almost  inhuman  aspect — till  rightly  un- 
derstood— must  presently  have  succumbed.  But  to 
the  biologist  it  cannot  die.  It  stands  to  him  on  the 
solid  ground  of  Nature.  It  has  a reason  in  the  laws 
of  life  which  must  resuscitate  it  and  give  it  another 
lease  of  years.  Bird-Life  makes  the  Bird.  Christ- 
Life  makes  the  Christian.  No  man  by  taking 
thought  can  add  a cubit  to  his  stature. 

So  much  for  the  scientific  evidence.  Here  is  the 


3*0 


CONFORMITY  TO  TYPE. 


corresponding  statement  of  the  truth  from  Scripture. 
Observe  the  passive  voice  in  these  sentences : Be* 

gotten  of  God  ; ‘‘  The  new  man  which  is  renewed 

in  knowledge  after  the  Image  of  Him  that  created 
him ; or  this,  “ We  are  changed  into  the  same 
Image ; or  this,  Predestinate  to  be  conformed  to 
the  Image  of  His  Son;”  or  again,  ‘‘Until  Christ 
be  formed  in  you  ; ” or  “ Except  a man  be  born 
again  he  cannot  see  the  Kingdom  of  God  ; ” “ Ex- 
cept a man  be  born  of  water  and  of  the  Spirit  he 
cannot  enter  the  Kingdom  of  God.”  There  is  one 
outstanding  verse  which  seems  at  first  sight  on  the 
other  side : “ Work  out  your  own  salvation  with 
fear  and  trembling ; ” but  as  one  reads  on  he  finds, 
as  if  the  writer  dreaded  the  very  misconception, 
the  complement,  “ For  it  is  God  which  worketh  in 
you  both  to  will  and  to  do  of  His  good  pleasure.” 
It  will  be  noticed  in  these  passages,  and  in  others 
which  might  be  named,  that  the  process  of  trans- 
formation is  referred  indifferently  to  the  agency  of 
each  Person  of  the  Trinity  in  turn.  We  are  not 
concerned  to  take  up  this  question  of  detail.  It 
is  sufficient  that  the  transformation  is  wrought 
Theologians,  however,  distinguish  thus  : the  indirect 
agent  is  Christ,  the  direct  influence  is  the  Holy 
Spirit.  In  other  words,  Christ  by  His  Spirit  renews 
the  souls  of  men. 


CONFORMITY  TO  TYPE.  3” 

Is  man,  then,  out  of  the  arena  altogether  ? Is 
he  mere  clay  in  the  hands  of  the  potter,  a machine, 
a tool,  an  automaton  ? Yes  and  No.  If  he  were  a 
tool  he  would  not  be  a man.  If  he  were  a man 
he  would  have  something  to  do.  One  need  not 
seek  to  balance  what  God  does  here,  and  what  man 
does.  But  we  shall  attain  to  a sufficient  measure 
of  truth  on  a most  delicate  problem  if  we  make  a 
final  appeal  to  the  natural  life.  We  find  that  in 
maintaining  this  natural  life  Nature  has  a share  and 
man  has  a share.  By  far  the  larger  part  is  done 
for  us — the  breathing,  the  secreting,  the  circulating 
of  the  blood,  the  building  up  of  the  organism.  And 
although  the  part  which  man  plays  is  a minor  part, 
yet,  strange  to  say,  it  is  not  less  essential  to  the 
well-being,  and  even  to  the  being,  of  the  whole. 
For  instance,  man  has  to  take  food.  He  has  no- 
thing to  do  with  it  after  he  has  once  taken  it,  for 
the  moment  it  passes  his  lips  it  is  taken  in  hand 
by  reflex  actions  and  handed  on  from  one  organ  to 
another,  his  control  over  it,  in  the  natural  course 
of  things,  being  completely  lost.  But  the  initial 
act  was  his.  And  without  that  nothing  could  have 
been  done.  Now  whether  there  be  an  exact  analog)’ 
between  the  voluntary  and  involuntary  functions  in 
the  body,  and  the  corresponding  processes  m the 
loul,  we  do  not  at  present  inquire.  But  this  will 


312 


CONFORMITY  TO  TYPJL. 


indicate,  at  least,  that  man  has  his  own  part  to 
play.  Let  him  choose  Life  ; let  him  daily  nourish 
his  soul ; let  him  for  ever  starve  the  old  life ; let 
him  abide  continuously  as  a living  branch  in  the 
Vine,  and  the  True-Vine  Life  will  flow  into  his 
soul,  assimilating,  renewing,  conforming  to  Type,  till 
Christ,  pledged  by  His  own  law,  be  formed  in  him. 

We  have  been  dealing  with  Christianity  at  its 
most  mystical  point.  Mark  here  once  more  its 
absolute  naturalness.  The  pursuit  of  the  Type  is 
just  what  all  Nature  is  engaged  ia  Plant'and  insect, 
fish  and  reptile,  bird  and  mammal — these  in  their 
several  spheres  are  striving  after  the  Type.  To 
prevent  its  extinction,  to  ennoble  it,  to  people  earth 
and  sea  and  sky  with  it ; this  is  the  meaning  of  the 
Struggle  for  Life.  And  this  is  our  life — to  pursue 
the  Type,  to  populate  the  world  with  it. 

Our  religion  is  not  all  a mistake.  We  are  not 
visionaries.  We  are  not  " unpractical,**  as  men 
pronounce  us,  when  we  worship.  To  try  to  follow 
Christ  is  not  to  be  ^‘lighteous  overmuch.**  True 
men  are  not  rhapsodizing  when  they  preach ; nor 
do  those  waste  their  lives  who  waste  themselves  in 
striving  to  extend  the  Kingdom  of  God  on  earth. 
This  is  what  life  is  for.  The  Christian  in  his  life- 
aim  is  in  strict  line  with  Nature.  What  men  call 
his  supernatural  is  quite  natural. 


CONFORMITY  TO  TYPE. 


3*3 


Mark  well  also  the  splendour  of  this  idea  of 
salvation.  It  is  not  merely  final  ‘‘  safety,”  to  be  for- 
given sin,  to  evade  the  curse.  It  is  not,  vaguely^ 
‘^to  get  to  heaven.”  It  is  to  be  conformed  to  the 
Image  of  the  Son.  It  is  for  these  poor  elements  to 
attain  to  the  Supreme  Beauty.  The  organizing  Life 
being  Eternal,  so  must  this  Beauty  be  immortal.  Its 
progress  towards  the  Immaculate  is  already  guar- 
anteed. And  more  than  all  there  is  here  fulfilled 
the  sublimest  of  all  prophecies  ; not  Beauty  alone 
but  Unity  is  secured  by  the  Type — Unity  of  man 
and  man,  God  and  man,  God  and  Christ  and  man, 
till  “ all  shall  be  one.” 

Could  Science  in  its  most  brilliant  anticipations 
for  the  future  of  its  highest  organism  ever  have  fore- 
shadowed a development  like  this  1 Now  that  the 
revelation  is  made  to  it,  it  surely  recognises  it  as  the 
missing  point  in  Evolution,  the  climax  to  which  all 
Creation  tends.  Hitherto  Evolution  had  no  future. 
It  was  a pillar  with  marvellous  carving,  growing 
richer  and  finer  towards  the  top,  biit  without  a 
capital;  a pyramid,  the  vast  base  buried  in  the 
inorganic,  towering  higher  and  higher,  tier  above  tier, 
life  above  life,  mind  above  mind,  ever  more  perfect 
in  its  workmanship,  more  noble  in  its  symmetry,  and 
yet  withal  so  much  the  more  mysterious  in  its  aspira- 
tion. The  most  curious  eye,  following  it  upward^ 


314  CONFORMITY  TO  TYPE, 

saw  nothing.  The  cloud  fell  and  covered  it  Just 
what  men  wanted  to  see  was  hid.  The  work  of  the 
ages  had  no  apex.  But  the  work  begun  by  Nature 
is  finished  by  the  Supernatural — as  we  are  wont  to 
call  the  higher  natural.  And  as  the  veil  is  lifted  by 
Christianity  it  strikes  men  dumb  with  wonder.  For 
the  goal  of  Evolution  is  Jesus  Christ. 

The  Christian  life  is  the  only  life  that  will  ever  be 
completed.  Apart  from  Christ  the  life  of  man  is 
a broken  pillar,  the  race  of  men  an  unfinished 
pyramid.  One  by  one  in  sight  of  Eternity  all  human 
Ideals  fall  short,  one  by  one  before  the  open  grave 
all  human  hopes  dissolve.  The  Laureate  sees  a 
moment’s  light  in  Nature’s  jealousy  for  the  Type; 
but  that  too  vanishes. 

“ ‘ So  careful  of  the  type  ? ' but  no 

From  scarped  cliff  and  quarried  stone 
She  cries,  ^ A thousand  types  are  gone  ; 

I care  for  nothing,  all  shall  go/  " 

All  shall  go  ? No,  one  Type  remains.  ‘‘Whom  He 
did  foreknow  He  also  did  predestinate  to  be  con- 
formed to  the  Image  of  His  Son.”  And  “when 
Christ  who  is  our  life  shall  appear,  then  shall  ye  also 
appear  with  Him  in  glory.” 


SEMI-PARASITISMe 


^ The  Situation  that  has  not  its  Duty,  its  Ideal,  was  nevef 
yet  occupied  by  man.  Yes,  here,  in  this  poor,  miserable,  ham- 
pered, despicable  Actual,  wherein  thou  even  now  standest,  hen 
or  nowhere  is  thy  Ideal : work  it  out  therefrom  : and  workings 
believe,  live,  be  /reel* 


C4SXVLS. 


SEMI-PARASITISM. 

“ Work  ouv  your  own  salvation.” — Paul, 

**  Any  new  set  of  conditions  occurring  to  an  animal  which 
render  its  food  and  safety  very  easily  attained,  seem  to  lead  as 
a rule  to  degeneration.” — £.  Ray  Lankester, 

Parasites  are  the  paupers  of  Nature.  They  are 
forms  of  life  which  will  not  take  the  trouble  to  find 
their  own  food,  but  borrow  or  steal  it  from  the  more 
industrious.  So  deep-rooted  is  this  tendency  in 
Nature,  that  plants  may  become  parasitic — it  is  an 
acquired  habit — as  well  as  animals  ; and  both  are 
found  in  every  state  of  beggary,  some  doing  a little 
for  themselves,  while  others,  more  abject,  refuse  even 
to  prepare  their  own  food. 

There  are  certain  plants — the  Dodder,  for  instance 
— which  begin  life  with  the  best  intentions,  stiike 
true  roots  into  the  soil,  and  really  appear  as  if  they 
meant  to  be  independent  for  life.  But  after  support- 
ing themselves  for  a brief  period  they  fix  curious 
sucking  discs  into  the  stem  and  branches  of  adjacent 
plants.  And  after  a little  experimenting,  the 


318 


SEMh  PARASITISM 


epiphyte  finally  ceases  to  do  anything  for  its  own 
support,  thenceforth  drawing  all  its  supplies  ready- 
made from  the  sap  of  its  host.  In  this  parasitic  state 
it  has  no  need  for  organs  of  nutrition  of  its  own.  and 
Nature  therefore  takes  them  away.  Henceforth,  to 
the  botanist,  the  adult  Dodder  presents  the  degraded 
spectacle  of  a plant  without  a root,  without  a twig, 
without  a leaf,  and  having  a stem  so  useless  as  to  be 
inadequate  to  bear  its  own  weight. 

In  the  Mistletoe  the  parasitic  habit  has  reached  a 
stage  in  some  respects  lower  still.  It  has  persisted  in 
the  downward  course  for  so  many  generations  that 
the  young  forms  even  have  acquired  the  habit  and 
usually  begin  life  at  once  as  parasites.  The  Mistletoe 
berries,  which  contain  the  seed  of  the  future  plant,  are 
developed  specially  to  minister  to  this  degeneracy,  for 
they  glue  themselves  to  the  branches  of  some  neigh- 
bouring oak  or  apple,  and  there  the  young  Mistletoe 
starts  as  a dependent  from  the  fiiift. 

Among  animals  these  lazzaroni  are  more  largely 
represented  still.  Almost  every  animal  is  a living 
poor-house,  and  harbours  one  or  more  species  of 
epizoa  or  entozoay  supplying  them  gratis,  not  only 
with  a permanent  home,  but  with  all  the  necessaries 
and  luxuries  of  life. 

Why  does  the  naturalist  think  hardly  of  the 
parasites  ? Why  does  he  speak  of  them  as  degraded, 


SEMI-PARASITISM. 


3*9 


and  despise  them  as  the  most  ignoble  creatures  in 
Nature  ? What  more  can  an  animal  do  than  est, 
drink,  and  die  to-morrow?  If  under  the  fostering 
care  and  protection  of  a higher  organism  it  can  eat 
better,  drink  more  easily,  live  more  merrily,  and  die, 
perhaps,  not  till  the  day  after,  why  should  it  not  do 
so  ? Is  parasitism,  after  all,  not  a somewhat  clever 
ruse}  Is  it  not  an  ingenious  way  of  securing  the 
benefits  of  life  while  evading  its  responsibilities  ? 
And  although  this  mode  of  livelihood  is  selfish,  and 
possibly  undignified,  can  it  be  said  that  it  is  im- 
moral ? 

The  naturalist’s  reply  to  this  is  brief.  Parasitism, 
he  will  say,  is  one  of  the  gravest  crimes  in  Nature. 
It  is  a breach  of  the  law  of  Evolution.  Thou  shalt 
evolve,  thou  shalt  develop  all  thy  faculties  to  the 
full,  thou  shalt  attain  to  the  highest  conceivable 
perfection  of  thy  race — and  so  perfect  thy  race — this 
is  the  first  and  greatest  commandment  of  Nature. 
But  the  parasite  has  no  thought  for  its  race,  or  for 
perfection  in  any  shape  or  form.  It  wants  two 
things — food  and  shelter.  How  it  gets  them  is  of 
no  moment.  Each  member  lives  exclusively  on  its 
own  account,  an  isolated,  indolent,  selfish,  and  back- 
sliding life. 

The  remarkable  thing  is  that  Nature  permits  the 
community  to  be  taxed  in  this  way  apparently  with- 


320 


SEMI-PARASITISM. 


out  protest.  For  the  parasite  is  a consumer  pure 
and  simple.  And  the  Perfect  Economy  of  Nature  ” 
is  surely  for  once  at  fault  when  it  encourages  species 
numbered  by  thousands  which  produce  nothing  for 
their  own  or  for  the  general  good,  but  live,  and  live 
luxuriously,  at  the  expense  of  others 

Now  when  we  look  into  the  matter,  we  very  soon 
perceive  that  instead  of  secretly  countenancing  this 
ingenious  device  by  which  parasitic  animals  and 
plants  evade  the  great  law  of  the  Struggle  for  Life, 
Nature  sets  her  face  most  sternly  against  it.  And, 
instead  of  allowing  the  transgressors  to  slip  through 
her  fingers,  as  one  might  at  first  suppose,  she  visits 
upon  them  the  most  severe  and  terrible  penalties. 
The  parasite,  she  argues,  not  only  injures  itself,  but 
wrongs  others.  It  disobeys  the  fundamental  law  of  its 
own  being,  and  taxes  the  innocent  to  contribute  to  its 
disgrace.  So  that  if  Nature  is  just,  if  Nature  has  an 
avenging  hand,  if  she  holds  one  vial  of  wrath  more 
full  and  bitter  than  another,  it  shall  surely  be  poured 
out  upon  those  who  are  guilty  of  this  double  sin. 
Let  us  see  what  form  this  punishment  takes. 

Observant  visitors  to  the  sea-side,  or  let  us  say  to 
an  aquarium,  are  familiar  with  those  curious  little 
creatures  known  as  Hermit-crabs.  The  peculiarity 
of  the  Hermits  is  that  they  take  up  their  abode  in 
the  cast-off  shell  of  some  other  animal,  not  unusually 


SEMLPABASITISM, 


321 


the  whelk  ; and  here,  like  Diogenes  in  his  tub,  the 
creature  lives  a solitary,  but  by  no  means  an  inactive 
life. 

The  PaguruSy  however,  is  not  a parasite.  And  yet 
although  in  no  sense  of  the  word  a parasite,  this 
way  of  inhabiting  throughout  life  a house  built  by 
another  animal  approaches  so  closely  the  parasitic 
habit,  that  we  shall  find  it  instructive  as  a prelimi- 
nary illustration,  to  consider  the  effect  of  this  free- 
house  policy  on  the  occupant.  There  is  no  doubt,  to 
begin  with,  that,  as  has  been  already  indicated,  the 
habit  is  an  acquired  one.  In  its  general  anatomy  the 
Hermit  is  essentially  a crab.  Now  the  crab  is  an 
animal  which,  from  the  nature  of  its  environment, 
has  to  lead  a somewhat  rough  and  perilous  life.  Its 
days  are  spent  amongst  jagged  rocks  and  boulders. 
Dashed  about  by  every  wave,  attacked  on  every  side 
by  monsters  of  the  deep,  the  crustacean  has  to 
protect  itself  by  developing  a strong  and  serviceable 
coat  of  mail. 

How  best  to  protect  themselves  has  been  the 
problem  to  which  the  whole  crab  family  have 
addressed  themselves  ; and,  in  considering  the  matter, 
the  ancestors  of  the  Hermit-crab  hit  on  the  happy 
device  of  re-utilising  the  habitations  of  the  molluscs 
which  lay  around  them  in  plenty,  well-built,  and 
ready  for  immediate  occupation.  For  generations 

Y 


322 


SEMI-PARASITISM. 


and  generations  accordingly,  the  Hermit-crab  has 
ceased  to  exercise  itself  upon  questions  of  safety,  and 
dwells  in  its  little  shell  as  proudly  and  securely  as  if 
its  second-hand  house  were  a fortress  erected  es- 
pecially for  its  private  use. 

Wherein,  then,  has  the  Hermit  suffered  for  this 
cheap,  but  real  solution  of  a practical  difficulty  ? 
Whether  its  laziness  costs  it  any  moral  qualms,  or 
whether  its  cleverness  becomes  to  it  a source  of  con- 
gratulation, we  do  not  know;  but  judged  from  the 
appearance  the  animal  makes  under  the  searching 
gaze  of  the  zoologist,  its  expedient  is  certainly  not 
one  to  be  commended.  To  the  eye  of  Science  its  sin 
is  written  in  the  plainest  characters  on  its  very 
organization.  It  has  suffered  in  its  own  anatomical 
structure  just  by  as  much  as  it  has  borrowed  from 
an  external  source.  Instead  of  being  a perfect 
crustacean  it  has  allowed  certain  important  parts  of 
its  body  to  deteriorate.  And  several  vital  organs  are 
partially  or  wholly  atrophied. 

Its  sphere  of  life  also  is  now  seriously  limited  ; 
and  by  a cheap  expedient  to  secure  safety,  it  has 
fatally  lost  its  independence.  It  is  plain  from  its 
anatomy  that  the  Hermit-crab  was  not  always  a 
Hermit-crab.  It  was  meant  for  higher  things.  • Its 
ancestors  doubtless  were  more  or  less  perfect  crus- 
taceans, though  what  exact  stage  of  development 


SEMJ-l*ARASITISM. 


323 


Aras  leached  before  the  hermit  habit  became  hxed  in 
the  species  we  cannot  tell  But  from  the  moment 
the  creature  took  to  relying  on  an  external  scuxce* 
it  began  to  fall  It  slowly  lost  in  its  own  person  all 
that  it  now  draws  from  external  aid. 

As  an  important  item  in  the  day's  work,  namely, 
the  securing  of  safety  and  shelter,  was  now  guaran- 
teed to  it,  one  of  the  chief  inducements  to  a life  of 
high  and  vigilant  effort  was  at  the  same  time  with- 
drawn. A number  of  functions,  in  fact,  struck  work 
The  whole  of  the  parts,  therefore,  of  the  complex 
organism  which  ministered  to  these  functions,  from 
lack  of  exercise,  or  total  disuse,  became  gradually 
feeble  ; and  ultimately,  by  the  stern  law  that  an  un- 
used organ  must  suffer  a slow  but  inevitable  atrophy, 
the  creature  not  only  lost  all  power  of  motion  in 
these  parts,  but  lost  the  parts  themselves,  and  other- 
wise sank  into  a relatively  degenerate  condition. 

Every  normal  crustacean,  on  the  other  hand,  has 
the  abdominal  region  of  the  body  covered  by  a thick 
chitinous  shell  In  the  Hermits  this  is  represented 
only  by  a thin  and  delicate  membrane — of  which  the 
sorry  figure  the  creature  cuts  when  drawn  from  its 
foreign  hiding-place  is  sufficient  evidence.  Any  one 
who  now  examines  further  this  half-naked  and  woe- 
begone object,  will  perceive  also  that  the  fourth  and 
fifth  pair  of  limbs  are  either  so  small  and  wasted 


324 


SEMI‘PARASITISM, 


to  be  quite  useless  or  altogether  rudimentary ; and, 
although  certainly  the  additional  development  of  the 
extremity  of  the  tail  into  an  organ  for  holding  on  to 
its  extemporised  retreat  may  be  regarded  as  a slight 
compensation,  it  is  clear  from  the  whole  structure  of 
the  animal  that  it  has  allowed  itself  to  undergo  severe 
Degeneration. 

In  dealing  with  the  Hermit-crab,  in  short,  we  are 
dealing  with  a case  of  physiological  backsliding 
That  the  creature  has  lost  anything  by  this  process 
from  a practical  point  of  view  is  not  now  argued.  It 
might  fairly  be  shown,  as  already  indicated,  that  its 
freedom  is  impaired  by  its  cumbrous  eko-skeleton, 
and  that,  in  contrast  with  other  crabs,  who  lead  a 
free  and  roving  life,  its  independence  generally  is 
greatly  limited.  But  from  the  physiological  stand- 
point, there  is  no  question  that  the  Hermit  tribe  have 
neither  discharged  their  responsibilities  to  Nature  nor 
to  themselves.  If  the  end  of  life  is  merely  to  escape 
death,  and  serve  themselves,  possibly  they  have  done 
well ; but  if  it  is  to  attain  an  ever  increasing  perfec- 
tion, then  are  they  backsliders  indeed. 

A zoologist’s  verdict  would.be  that  by  this  act 
they  have  forfeited  to  some  extent  their  place  in  the 
animal  scale.  An  animal  is  classed  as  low  or  high 
according  as  it  is  adapted  to  less  or  more  complex 
conditions  of  life.  This  is  the  true  standpoint  from 


:SEMI-PA  RASITISM, 


325 


which  to  judge  all  living  organisms.  Were  perfection 
merely  a matter  of  continual  eating  and  drinking, 
the  Amoeba — the  lowest  known  organism — might 
take  rank  with  the  highest,  Man,  for  the  one  nou- 
rishes itself  and  saves  its  skin  almost  as  completely 
as  the  other.  But  judged  by  the  higher  standard  of 
Complexity,  that  is,  by  greater  or  lesser  adaptation 
to  more  or  less  complex  conditions,  the  gulf  between 
them  is  infinite. 

We  have  now  received  a preliminary  idea,  although 
not  from  the  study  of  a true  parasite,  of  the  essential 
principles  involved  in  parasitism.  And  we  may  pro- 
ceed to  point  out  the  correlative  in  the  moral  and 
spiritual  spheres.  We  confine  ourselves  for  the  pre- 
sent to  one  point.  The  difference  between  the 
Hermit-crab  and  a true  parasite  is,  that  the  formei 
has  acquired  a semi-parasitic  habit  only  with  refer- 
ence to  safety.  It  may  be  that  the  Hermit  devours 
as  a preliminary  the  accommodating  mollusc  whose 
tenement  it  covets  ; but  it  would  become  a real 
parasite  only  on  the  supposition  that  the  whelk  was 
of  such  size  as  to  keep  providing  for  it  throughout 
life,  and  that  the  external  and  internal  organs  of  the 
crab  should  disappear,  while  it  lived  henceforth,  by 
simple  imbibation,  upon  the  elaborated  juices  of  its 
host.  All  the  mollusc  provides,  however,  for  the 
crustacean  in  this  instance  is  safety,  and,  accordingly 


|26 


SEMIPARASITISM, 


in  the  meantime  we  limit  our  application  to  this. 
The  true  parasite  presents  us  with  an  organism  so 
much  more  degraded  in  all  its  parts,  that  its  lessons 
may  well  be  reserved  until  we  have  paved  the  way 
to  understand  the  deeper  bearings  of  the  subject. 

The  spiritual  principle  to  be  illustrated  in  the 
meantime  stands  thus  : Any  principle  which  secures  tlu 
safety  of  the  individual  without  personal  effort  or  thfi- 
vital  exercise  of  faculty  is  disastrous  to  moral  character. 
We  do  not  begin  by  attempting  to  define  words. 
Were  we  to  define  truly  what  is  meant  by  safety  or 
salvation,  we  should  be  spared  further  elaboration, 
and  the  law  would  stand  out  as  a sententious  com- 
mon-place. But  we  have  to  deal  with  the  ideas  of 
safety  as  these  are  popularly  held,  and  the  chief  pur- 
pose at  this  stage  is  to  expose  what  may  be  called 
the  Parasitic  Doctrine  of  Salvation.  The  phases  of 
religious  experience  about  to  be  described  may  be 
unknown  to  many.  It  remains  for  those  who  are 
familiar  with  the  religious  conceptions  of  the  masses 
to  determine  whether  or  not  we  are  wasting  words. 

What  is  meant  by  the  Parasitic  Doctrine  of  Salva- 
tion one  may,  perhaps,  best  explain  by  sketching  two 
of  its  leading  types.  The  first  is  the  doctrine  of  the 
Church  of  Rome  ; the  second,  that  represented  by 
the  narrovs  er  Evangelical  Religion.  We  take  these 
religions,  however,  not  in  their  ideal  form,  with  which 


SEMI-PARASITISM, 


327 


possibly  we  should  have  little  quarrel,  but  in  thei? 
practical  working,  or  in  the  form  in  which  they  are 
held  especially  by  the  rank  and  file  of  those  who 
belong  respectively  to  these  communions.  For  the 
strength  or  weakness  of  any  religious  system  is  best 
judged  from  the  form  in  which  it  presents  itself  to, 
and  influences  the  common  mind. 

No  more  perfect  or  more  sad  example  of  semi- 
parasitism exists  than  in  the  case  of  those  illiterate 
thousands  who,  scattered  everywhere  throughout 
the  habitable  globe,  swell  the  lower  ranks  of  the 
Church  of  Rome.  Had  an  organization  been  spe- 
cially designed,  indeed,  to  induce  the  parasitic  habit 
in  the  souls  of  men,  nothing  better  fitted  to  its  dis- 
astrous end  could  be  established  than  the  system  of 
Roman  Catholicism.  Roman  Catholicism  offers  to 
the  masses  a molluscan  shell.  They  have  simply  to 
shelter  themselves  within  its  pale,  and  they  are 
‘‘safe.”  But  what  is  this  “ safe  ” ? It  is  an  exl*  rnal 
safety — the  safety  of  an  institution.  It  is  a salvation 
recommended  to  men  by  all  that  appeals  to  the 
motives  in  most  common  use  with  the  vulgar  and 
the  superstitious,  but  which  has  as  little  vital  connec- 
tion with  the  individual  soul  as  the  dead  whelk’s 
shell  with  the  living  Hermit.  Salvation  is  a relation 
at  once  vital,  personal,  and  spiritual.  This  is  me- 
chanical and  purely  external.  And  this  is  of  course 


|28 


SEMI-PARASI TISM. 


the  final  secret  of  its  marvellous  success'  ,and  world- 
wide power.  A cheap  religion  is  the^esideraturn  of 
the  human  heart ; and  an  assurance  of  salvation  at 
the  smallest  possible  cost  forms  the  tempting  bait 
held  out  to  a conscience-stricken  world  by  the  Romish 
Church.  Thousands,  therefore,  who  have  never  been 
taught  to  use  their  faculties  in  ‘‘  working  out  their 
own  salvation/*  thousands  who  will  not  exercise 
themselves  religiously,  and  who  yet  cannot  be  with- 
out the  exercises  of  religion,  intrust  themselves  in 
idle  faith  to  that  venerable  house  of  refuge  which 
for  centuries  has  stood  between  God  and  man.  A 
Church  which  has  harboured  generations  of  the 
elect,  whose  archives  enshrine  the  names  of  saints 
whose  foundations  are  consecrated  with  martyrs’ 
blood — shall  it  not  afford  a sure  asylum  still  for  any 
soul  which  would  make  its  peace  with  God  } So,  as 
the  Hermit  into  the  molluscan  shell,  creeps  the  poor 
soul  within  the  pale  of  Rome,  seeking,  like  Adam  in 
the  garden,  to  hide  its  nakedness  from  God. 

Why  does  the  true  lover  of  men  restrain  not 
nis  lips  in  warning  his  fellows  against  this  and  all 
other  priestly  religions  ? It  is  not  because  he  fails  to 
see  the  prodigious  energy  of  the  Papal  See,  or  to 
appreciate  the  many  noble  types  of  Christian  man- 
hood nurtured  within  its  pale.  Nor  is  it  because  its 
teachers  are  often  corrupt  and  its  system  of  doctrine 


SEMI^PARASITISAl. 


329 


inadequate  as  a representation  of  the  Truth — charges 
which  have  to  be  made  more  or  less  against  all  re- 
ligions. But  it  is  because  it  ministers  falsely  to  the 
deepest  need  of  man,  reduces  the  end  of  religion 
to  selfishness,  and  offers  safety  without  spirituality. 
That  these,  theoretically,  are  its  pretensions,  we  do 
not  affirm  ; but  that  its  practical  working  is  to  induce 
in  man,  and  in  its  worst  forms,  the  parasitic  habit,  is 
testified  by  results.  No  one  who  has  studied  the 
religion  of  the  Continent  upon  the  spot,  has  failed  to 
be  impressed  with  the  appalling  spectacle  of  tens  of 
thousands  of  unregenerate  men  sheltering  themselves, 
as  they  conceive  it  for  Eternity,  behind  the  Sacra- 
ments of  Rome. 

There  is  no  stronger  evidence  of  the  inborn  para- 
sitic tendency  in  man  in  things  religious  than  the 
absolute  complacency:  with  which  even  cultured  men 
will  hand  over  their  eternal  interests  to  the  care  of  a 
Church.  We  can  never  dismiss  from  memory  the 
sadness  with  which  we  once  listened  to  the  confession 
of  a certain  foreign  professor:  “I  used  to  be  con- 
cerned about  religion,”  he  said  in  substance,  ‘*but 
religion  is  a great  subject.  I was  very  busy  ; there 
was  little  time  to  settle  it  for  myself.  A Protestant, 
my  attention  was  called  to  the  Roman  Catholic 
religion.  It  suited  my  case.  And  instead  of  dab- 
bling in  religion  for  myself  I put  myself  in  its  hands 


330 


SEMI-PARASITISM, 


Once  a year,”  he  concluded,  “ I go  to  mass.”  These 
were  the  words  of  one  whose  work  will  live  in  the 
history  of  his  country,  one,  too,  who  knew  all  about 
parasitism.  Yet,  though  he  thought  it  not,  this  is 
parasitism  in  its  worst  and  most  degrading  form. 
Nor,  in  spite  of  its  intellectual,  not  to  say  moral  sin, 
is  this  an  extreme  or  exceptional  case.  It  is  a case, 
which  is  being  duplicated  every  day  in  our  own 
country,  only  here  the  confession  is  expressed  with  a 
candour  which  is  rare  in  company  with  actions  be- 
traying so  signally  the  want  of  it. 

The  form  of  parasitism  exhibited  by  a certain  sec- 
tion of  the  narrower  Evangelical  school  is  altogether 
different  from  that  of  the  Church  of  Rome.  The 
parasite  in  this  case  seeks  its  shelter,  not  in  a Churchy 
but  in  a Doctrine  or  a Creed.  Let  it  be  observed 
again  that  we  are  not  dealing  with  the  Evangelical 
Religion,  but  only  with  one  of  its  parasitic  forms — a 
form  which  will  at  once  be  recognised  by  all  who 
know  the  popular  Protestantism  of  this  country.  We 
confine  ourselves  also  at  present  to  that  form  which 
finds  its  encouragement  in  a single  doctrine,  that 
doctrine  being  the  Doctrine  of  the  Atonement — let 
us  say,  rather,  a perverted  form  of  this  central  truth. 

The  perverted  Doctrine  of  the  Atonement,  which 
tends  to  beget  the  parasitic  habit,  may  be  defined  in 
g single  sentence — it  is  very  much  because  it  can  be 


SEMI-PARASITISM. 


33> 


defined  in  a single  sentence  that  it  is  a perversioa 
Let  us  state  it  in  a concrete  form.  It  is  put  to  the 
individual  in  the  following  syllogism:  ‘‘You  believe 
Christ  died  for  sinners ; you  are  a sinner ; therefore 
Christ  died  for  you  ; and  hence  you  ai^e  saved!^  Now 
what  is  this  but  another  species  of  molluscan  shell  ? 
Could  any  trap  for  a benighted  soul  be  more  ingen- 
iously planned  ? It  is  not  superstition  that  is  ap- 
pealed to  this  time ; it  is  reason.  The  agitated  soul 
is  invited  to  creep  into  the  convolutions  of  a syllo- 
gism, and  entrench  itself  behind  a Doctrine  more 
venerable  even  than  the  Church.  But  words  are 
mere  chitine.  Doctrines  may  have  no  more  vital 
contact  with  the  soul  than  priest  or  sacrament,  no 
further  influence  on  life  and  character  than  stone  and 
lime.  And  yet  the  apostles  of  parasitism  pick  a 
blackguard  from  the  streets,  pass  him  through  this 
plausible  formula,  and  turn  him  out  a convert  in  the 
space  of  as  many  minutes  as  it  takes  to  tell  it. 

The  zeal  of  these  men,  assuredly,  is  not  to  be 
questioned  : their  instincts  are  right,  and  their  work 
is  often  not  in  vain.  It  is  possible,  too,  up  to  a 
certain  point,  to  defend  this  Salvation  by  Formula. 
Are  these  not  the  very  words  of  Scripture?  Did 
not  Christ  Himself  say,  “It  is  finished  ? And  is  it 
not  written,  “ By  grace  are  ye  saved  through  faith,” 
“ Not  of  works,  lest  any  man  should  boast”  and  “ He 


332 


SEMI-FARASITISM. 


that  believeth  on  the  Son  hath  everlasting  life^*?  To 
which,  however,  one  might  also  answer  in  the  words 
of  Scripture,  The  Devils  also  believe,”  and  “ Except 
a man  be  born  again  he  cannot  see  the  Kingdom  of 
God.”  But  without  seeming  to  make  text  refute 
text,  let  us  ask  rather  what  the  supposed  convert 
possesses  at  the  end  of  the  process.  That  Christ 
saves  sinners,  even  blackguards  from  the  streets,  is  a 
great  fact ; and  that  the  simple  words  of  the  street 
evangelist  do  sometimes  bring  this  home  to  man  with 
convincing  power  is  also  a fact.  But  in  ordinary 
circumstances,  when  the  inquirer’s  mind  is  rapidly 
urged  through  the  various  stages  of  the  above  piece 
of  logic,  he  is  left  to  face  the  future  and  blot  out  the 
past  with  a formula  of  words. 

To  be  sure  these  words  may  already  convey  a 
germ  of  truth,  they  may  yet  be  filled  in  with  a 
wealth  of  meaning  and  become  a lifelong  power. 
But  we  would  state  the  case  against  Salvation  by 
Formula  with  ignorant  and  unwarranted  clemency 
did  we  for  a moment  convey  the  idea  that  this  is 
always  the  actual  result.  The  doctrine  plays  too 
well  into  the  hands  of  the  parasitic  tendency  to  make 
it  possible  that  in  more  than  a minority  of  cases  the 
result  is  anything  but  disastrous.  And  it  is  disas- 
trous not  in  that,  sooner  or  later,  after  losing  half 
their  lives,  those  who  rely  on  the  naked  syllogism 


SEMI-  PA  RASITISM. 


333 


come  to  see  their  mistake,  but  in  that  thousands 
nCTer  come  to  see  it  all.  Are  there  not  men  who 
can  prove  to  you  and  to  the  world,  by  the  irresistible 
logic  of  texts,  that  they  are  saved,  whom  you  know 
to  be  not  only  unworthy  of  the  Kingdom  of  God — 
which  we  all  are — but  absolutely  incapable  of  enter- 
ing it  ? The  condition  of  membership  in  the  King- 
dom of  God  is  well  known  ; who  fulfil  this  condition 
and  who  do  not,  is  not  well  known.  And  yet  the 
moral  test,  in  spite  of  the  difficulty  of  its  applications, 
will  always,  and  rightly,  be  preferred  by  the  world  to 
the  theological.  Nevertheless,  in  spite  of  the  world’s 
verdict,  the  parasite  is  content.  He  is  " safe.”  Years 
ago  his  mind  worked  through  a certain  chain  of 
phrases  in  which  the  words  “ believe  ” and  saved  ” 
were  the  conspicuous  terms,  And  from  that  mo- 
ment, by  all  Scriptures,  by  all  logic,  and  by  all 
theology,  his  future  was  guaranteed.  He  took  out, 
in  short,  an  insurance  policy,  by  which  he  was  in- 
fallibly secured  eternal  life  at  death.  This  is  not  a 
matter  to  make  light  of.  We  wish  we  were  caricatur- 
ing instead  of  representing  things  as  they  are.  But 
we  carry  with  us  all  who  intimately  know  the  spiri- 
tual  condition  of  the  Narrow  Church  in  asserting 
that  in  some  cases  at  least  its  members  have  nothing 
more  to  show  for  their  religion  than  a formula,  a 
syllogism,  a cant  phrase  or  an  experience  of  som« 


»34 


SEMI^PAI^ASITISM. 


kind  which  happened  long  ago,  and  wnich  men  told 
them  at  the  time  was  called  Salvation.  Need  we 
proceed  to  formulate  objections  to  the  parasitism  of 
Evangelicism  i Between  it  and  the  Religion  of  the 
Church  of  Rome  there  is  an  affinity  as  real  as  it  is 
unsuspected.  For  one  thing  these  religions  are  spiri- 
tually disastrous  as  well  as  theologically  erroneous  in 
propagating  a false  conception  of  Christianity.  The 
fundamental  idea  alike  of  the  extreme  Roman 
Catholic  and  extreme  Evangelical  Religions  is 
Escape.  Man’s  chief  end  is  to  “get  off.”  And  all 
factors  in  religion,  the  highest  and  most  sacred,  are 
degraded  to  this  level.  God,  for  example,  is  a Great 
Lawyer.  Or  He  is  the  Almighty  Enemy  ; it  is  from 
Him  we  have  to  “get  off”  Jesus  Christ  is  the  One 
who  gets  us  off — a theological  figure  who  contrives 
so  to  adjust  matters  federally  that  the  way  is  clear. 
The  Church  in  the  one  instance  is  a kind  of  con- 
veyancing office  where  the  transaction  is  duly  con- 
cluded, each  party  accepting  the  other’s  terms;  in 
the  other  case,  a species  of  sheep-pen  where  the  flock 
awaits  impatiently  and  indolently  the  final  consum- 
mation. Generally,  the  means  are  mistaken  for  the 
end,  and  the  opening-up  of  the  possibility  of  spiritual 
growth  becomes  the  signal  to  stop  growing. 

Second,  these  being  cheap  religions,  are  inevitably 
accompanied  by  a cheap  life.  Safety  being  guaran- 


SEMI-PARASITISM. 


335 


teed  from  the  first,  there  remains  nothing  else  to 
be  done.  The  mechanical  way  in  which  the  trans^ 
acticn  is  effected,  leaves  the  soul  without  stimulus, 
and  the  character  remains  untouched  by  the  moral 
aspects  of  the  sacrifice  of  Christ.  He  who  is  unjust 
is  unjust  still;  he  who  is  unholy  is  unholy  still. 
Thus  the  whole  scheme  ministers  to  the  Degenera- 
tion of  Organs.  For  here,  again,  by  just  as  much  as 
the  organism  borrows  mechanically  from  an  external 
source,  by  so  much  exactly  does  it  lose. in  its  own 
organization.  Whatever  rest  is  provided  by  Chris- 
tianity for  the  children  of  God,  it  is  certainly  never 
contemplated  that  it  should  supersede  personal  effort. 
And  any  rest  which  ministers  to  indifference  is  im- 
moral and  unreal — it  makes  parasites  and  not  men, 
Just  because  God  worketh  in  him,  as  the  evidence 
and  triumph  of  it,  the  true  child  of  God  works  out 
his  own  salvation — works  it  out  having  really  re- 
ceived it — not  as  a light  thing,  a superfluous  labour, 
but  with  fear  and  trembling  as  a reasonable  and  in- 
dispensable service. 

If  it  be  asked,  then,  shall  the  parasite  be  saved  or 
shall  he  not,  the  answer  is  that  the  idea  of  salvation 
conveyed  by  the  question  makes  a reply  all  but 
hopeless.  But  if  by  salvation  is  meant,  a trusting  in 
Christ  in  order  to  likeness  to  Christy  in  order  to  that 
holiness  without  which  no  man  shall  see  ^he  Lord^ 


336 


SEMI-PARASITISM. 


the  reply  is  that  the  parasite’s  hope  is  absolutely  vaia 
So  far  from  ministering  to  growth,  parasitism  minis- 
ters to  decay.  So  far  from  ministering  to  holiness, 
that  is  to  wholeness^  parasitism  ministers  to  exactly 
the  opposite.  One  by  one  the  spiritual  faculties 
droop  and  die,  one  by  one  from  lack  of  exercise  the 
muscles  of  the  soul  grow  weak  and  flaccid,  one  by 
one  the  moral  activities  cease.  So  from  him  that 
hath  not,  is  taken  away  that  which  he  hath,  and  after 
a few  years  of  parasitism  there  is  nothing  left  to 
save. 

If  our  meaning  up  to  this  point  has  been  suffi- 
ciently obscure  to  make  the  objection  now  possible 
that  this  protest  against  Parasitism  is  opposed  to  the 
doctrines  of  Free  Grace,  we  cannot  hope  in  a closing 
sentence  to  free  the  argument  from  a suspicion  so 
ill-judged.  The  adjustment  between  Faith  and 
Works  does  not  fall  within  our  province  now.  Sal- 
vation truly  is  the  free  gift  of  God,  but  he  who  really 
knows  how  much  this  means  knows — and  just  be- 
cause it  means  so  much— how  much  of  consequent 
action  it  involves.  With  the  central  doctrines  of 
grace  the  whole  scientific  argument  is  in  too  wonder- 
ful harmony  to  be  found  wanting  here.  The  natural 
life,  not  less  than  the  eternal,  is  the  gift  of  God.  But 
life  in  either  case  is  the  beginning  of  growth  and  not 
the  end  of  grace.  To  pause  where  we  should  begin^ 


SEMI -PA  RASITISM. 


337 


to  retrograde  where  we  should  advance,  to  seek  a 
mechanical  security  that  we  may  cover  inertia  and 
find  a wholesale  salvation  in  which  there  is  no  per^ 
sonal  sanctification — this  is  Parasitism. 


PARASITISM. 


^ And  $0  / Uvij  you  seo^ 

Go  through  thi  worlds  iry^  i>rove^  rejed^ 
PreJcTy  still  struggling  to  effect 
My  warfare;  happy  that  I can 
Be  crossed  and  thwarted  as  a man^ 

Not  left  in  Godls  contempt  aparty 
With  ghastly  smooth  life^  dead  at  hearty 
Tame  in  earthls  paddock  as  her  prize, 

# # « « « 

Thank  Gody  no  paradise  stands  barred 
To  entry  y and  I find  it  hard 
To  be  a Christiany  as  / saidP 


Brown 


PARASITISM 


^ Work  out  your  own  salvation.” — Paul. 

no  longer  a chaos,  but  a World,  or  even  (Vorldkin, 
Produce  ! Produce  ! Were  it  but  the  pitifullest  infinitesmal 
fraction  of  a Product,  produce  k,  in  God's  name  I ” — Carlyle. 

From  a study  of  the  habits  and  organization  of 
the  family  of  Hermit-crabs  we  have  already  gained 
some  insight  into  the  nature  and  effects  of  para- 
sitism. But  the  Hermit-crab,  be  it  remembered,  is 
in  no  real  sense  a parasite.  And  before  we  can 
apply  the  general  principle  further  we  must  address 
ourselves  briefly  to  the  examination  of  a true  case 
of  parasitism. 

We  have  not  far  to  seek.  Within  the  body  of 
the  Hermit-crab  a minute  organism  may  frequently 
be  discovered  resembling,  when  magnified,  a minia- 
ture kidney-bean.  A bunch  of  root-like  processes 
hangs  from  one  side,  and  the  extremities  of  these 
are  seen  to  ramify  in  delicate  films  through  the 
living  tissues  of  the  crab. . This  simple  organism 
is  known  to  the  naturalist  as  a Sacculina ; and 


342 


PARASITISM. 


though  a full-grown  animal,  it  consists  of  no  more 
parts  than  those  just  named.  Not  a trace  of  struc- 
ture is  to  be  detected  within  this  rude  and  all  but 
inanimate  frame ; it  possesses  neither  legs,  nor 
eyes,  nor  mouth,  nor  throat,  nor  stomach,  nor 
any  other  organs,  external  or  internal.  This  Sac- 
culina  is  a typical  parasite.  By  means  of  its  twining 
and  theftuous  roots  it  imbibes  automatically  its 
nourishment  ready-prepared  from  the  body  of  the 
crab.  It  boards  indeed  entirely  at  the  expense  of 
its  host,  who  supplies  it  liberally  with  food  and 
shelter  and  everything  else  it  wants.  So  far  as  the 
result  to  itself  is  concerned  this  arrangement  may 
seem  at  first  sight  satisfactory  enough ; but  when 
we  inquire  into  the  life  history  of  this  small  creature 
we  unearth  a career  of  degeneracy  all  but  unparal- 
leled in  nature. 

The  most  certain  clue  to  what  nature  meant  any 
animal  to  become  is  to  be  learned  from  its  embry- 
ology. Let  us,  therefore,  examine  for  a moment  the 
earliest  positive  stage  in  the  development  of  the 
Sacculina.  When  the  embryo  first  makes  its  ap- 
pearance it  bears  not  the  remotest  resemblance  to 
the  adult  animal,  A different  name  even  is  given 
tc  it  by  the  biologist,  who  knows  it  at  this  period 
as  a Nauplius.  This  minute  organism  has  an  oval 
body,  supplied  with  six  well-jointed  feet  by  means 


PARASITISM. 


343 


of  which  it  paddles  briskly  through  the  water.  For 
a time  it  leads  an  active  and  independent  life,  in- 
dustriously securing  its  own  food  and  escaping 
enemies  by  its  own  gallantry.  But  soon  a change 
takes  place.  The  hereditary  taint  of  parasitism  is 
in  its  blood,  and  it  proceeds  to  adapt  itself  to  the 
pauper  habits  of  its  race.  The  tiny  body  first 
doubles  in  upon  itself,  and  from  the  two  front  limbs 
elongated  filaments  protrude.  Its  four  hind  limbs 
entirely  disappear,  and  twelve  short-forked  swimming 
organs  temporarily  take  their  place.  Thus  strangely 
metamorphosed  the  Sacculina  sets  out  in  search  of 
a suitable  host,  and  in  an  evil  hour,  by  that  fate 
which  is  always  ready  to  accommodate  the  trans- 
gressor, is  thrown  into  the  company  of  the  Hermit- 
crab.  With  its  two  filamentary  processes — which 
afterwards  develop  into  the  root-like  organs — it 
penetrates  the  body ; the  sac-like  form  is  gradually 
assumed ; the  whole  of  the  swimming  feet  drop  off, 
— they  will  never  be  needed  again, — and  the  animal 
settles  down  for  the  rest  of  its  life  as  a parasite. 

One  reason  which  makes  a zoologist  certain  that 
the  Sacculina  is  a degenerate  type  is,  that  in  almost 
all  other  instances  of  animals  which  begin  life  in 
the  Nauplius-form  — and  there  are  several  — the 
Nauplius  develops  through  higher  and  higher  stages, 
and  arrives  finally  at  the  high  perfection  displayed 


544 


PARASITISM. 


by  the  shrimp,  lobster,  crab,  and  other  crustaceana 
But  instead  of  rising  to  its  opportunities,  the  sac- 
culine  Nauplius  having  reached  a certain  point 
turned  back.  It  shrunk  from  the  struggle  for  life, 
and  beginning  probably  by  seeking  shelter  from  its 
host  went  on  to  demand  its  food  ; and  so  falling 
from  bad  to  worse,  became  in  time  an  entire  de- 
pendant. 

In  the  eyes  of  Nature  this  was  a twofold  crime. 
It  was  first  a disregard  of  evolution,  and  second, 
which  is  practically  the  same  thing,  an  evasion  of 
the  great  law  of  work.  And  the  revenge  of  Nature 
was  therefore  necessary.  It  could  not  help  punishing 
the  Sacculina  for  violated  law,  and  the  punishment, 
according  to  the  strange  and  noteworthy  way  in 
which  Nature  usually  punishes,  was  meted  out  by 
natural  processes,  carried  on  within  its  own  organiza- 
tion. Its  punishment  was  simply  that  it  was  a 
Sacculina— that  it  was  a Sacculina  when  it  might 
have  been  a Crustacean.  Instead  of  being  a free 
and  independent  organism  high  in  structure,  original 
in  action,  vital  with  energy,  it  deteriorated  into  a 
torpid  and  all  but  amorphous  sac  confined  to  pet- 
petual  imprisonment  and  doomed  to  a 'living  death. 
‘‘Any  new  set  of  conditions,”  says  Ray  Lankester, 
* occurring  to  an  animal  which  render  its  food  and 
safety  very  easily  attained,  seem  to  lead  as  a rule 


PARASITISM, 


34S 


to  degeneration  ; just  as  an  active  healthy  man 
sometimes  degenerates  when  he  becomes  suddenly' 
possessed  of  a fortune ; or  as  Rome  degenerated 
when  possessed  of  the  riches  of  the  ancient  world. 
The  habit  of  parasitism  clearly  acts  upon  animal 
organization  in  this  way.  Let  the  parasitic  life  once 
be  secured,  and  away  go  legs,  jaws,  eyes,  and  ears  ; 
the  active,  highly-gifted  crab,  insect,  or  annelid  may 
become  a mere  sac,  absorbing  nourishment  and 
laying  eggs.”  ^ 

There  could  be  no  more  impressive  illustration 
than  this  of  what  with  entire  appropriateness  one 
might  call  ‘‘  the  physiology  of  backsliding.’’  We 
fail  to  appreciate  the  meaning  of  spiritual  degenera- 
tion or  detect  the  terrible  nature  of  the  consequences 
only  because  they  evade  the  eye  of  sense.  But 
could  we  investigate  the  spirit  as  a living  organism, 
or  study  the  soul  of  the  backslider  on  principles  of 
comparative  anatomy,  v/e  should  have  a revelation 
of  the  organic  effects  of  sin,  even  of  the  mere  sin 
of  carelessness  as  to  growth  and  work,  which  must 
revolutionize  our  ideas  of  practical  religion.  There 
is  no  room  for  the  doubt  even  that  what  goes  on  in 
die  body  does  not  with  equal  certainty  take  place 
in  the  spirit  under  the  corresponding  conditions. 


Regeneration,"  by  E.  Ray  Lankester,  p.  33. 


546 


PARASITISM, 


The  penalty  of  backsliding  is  not  something  unreal 
and  vague,  some  unknown  quantity  which  may  be 
measured  out  to  us  disproportionately,  or  which 
perchance,  since  God  is  good,  we  may  altogether 
evade.  The  consequences  are  already  marked  within 
the  structure  of  the  soul.  So  to  speak,  they  are 
physiological.  The  thing  affected  by  our  indifference 
or  by  our  indulgence  is  not  the  book  of  final  judg- 
ment but  the  present  fabric  of  the  soul.  The  punish- 
ment of  degeneration  is  simply  degeneration — the 
loss  of  functions,  the  decay  of  organs,  the  atrophy  of 
the  spiritual  nature.  It  is  well  known  that  the 
recovery  of  the  backslider  is  one  of  the  hardest 
problems  in  spiritual  work.  To  reinvigorate  an  old 
organ  seems  more  difficult  and  hopeless  than  to 
develop  a new  one ; and  the  backslider’s  terrible 
lot  is  to  have  to  retrace  with  enfeebled  feet  each  step 
of  the  way  along  which  he  strayed;  to  make  up 
inch  by  inch  the  lee-way  he  has  lost,  carrying  with 
him  a dead-weight  of  acquired  reluctance,  and  scarce 
knowing  whether  to  be  stimulated  or  discouraged 
by  the  oppressive  memory  of  the  previous  fall. 

We  are  not,  however,  to  discuss  at  present  the 
physiology  of  backsliding.  Nor  need  we  point  out 
at  greater  length  that  parasitism  is  always  and 
indissolubly  accompanied  by  degeneration.  We 
wish  rather  to  examine  one  or  two  leading  tendencies 


PARASITISM. 


347 


of  the  modern  religious  life  which  directly  or  in- 
directly induce  the  parasitic  habit  and  bring  upon 
thousands  of  unsuspecting  victims  such  secret  and 
appalling  penalties  as  have  been  named. 

Two  main  causes  are  known  to  the  biologist  as 
tending  to  induce  the  parasitic  habit.  These  are, 
first,  the  temptation  to  secure  safety  without  the 
vital  exercise  of  faculties,  and,  second,  the  dispo- 
sition to  find  food  without  earning  it.  The  first, 
which  we  have  formally  considered,  is  probably  the 
preliminary  stage  in  most  cases.  The  animal,  seek- 
ing shelter,  finds  unexpectedly  that  it  can  also 
thereby  gain  a certain  measure  of  food.  Compelled 
in  the  first  instance,  perhaps  by  stress  of  circum- 
stances, to  rob  its  host  of  a meal  or  perish,  it  gradually 
acquires  the  habit  of  drawing  all  its  supplies  from 
the  same  source,  and  thus  becomes  in  time  a con- 
frmed  parasite.  Whatever  be  its  origin,  however, 
t is  certain  that  the  main  evil  of  parasitism  is  con- 
nected with  the  further  question  of  food.  Mere 
safety  with  Nature  is  a secondary,  though  by  no 
means  an  insignificant,  consideration.  And  while 
the  organism  forfeits  a part  of  its  organization  by 
any  method  of  evading  enemies  which  demands  no 
personal  effort,  the  most  entire  degeneration  of  the 
whole  system  follows  the  neglect  or  abuse  of  the 
functions  of  nutrition. 


348 


PARASITISM. 


The  direction  in  which  we  have  to  seek  the  wider 
application  of  the  subject  will  now  appear.  We 
have  to  look  into  those  cases  in  the  moral  and 
spiritual  sphere  in  which  the  functions  of  nutrition 
are  either  neglected  or  abused.  To  sustain  life^ 
physical,  mental,  moral,  or  spiritual,  some  sort  of 
food  is  essential.  To  secure  an  adequate  supply  each 
organism  also  is  provided  with  special  and  appro- 
priate faculties.  But  the  final  gain  to  the  organism 
does  not  depend  so  much  on  the  actual  amount  ol 
food  procured  as  on  the  exercise  required  to  obtain 
1*..  In  one  sense  the  exercise  is  only  a means  to  an 
end,  namely,  the  finding  food ; but  in  another  and 
equally  real  sense,  the  exercise  is  the  end,  the  food 
the  means  to  attain  that.  Neither  is  of  permanent 
use  without  the  other,  but  the  correlation  between 
them  is  so  intimate  that  it  were  idle  to  say  that  one 
is  more  necessary  than  the  other.  Without  food 
exercise  is  impossible,  but  without  exercise  food  is 
useless. 

Thus  exercise  is  in  order  to  food,  and  food  is  in 
order  to  exercise — in  order  especially  to  that  further 
progress  and  maturity  which  only  ceaseless  activity 
can  promote.  Now  food  too  easily  acquired  means 
food  without  that  accompaniment  of  discipline  which 
is  infinitely  more  valuable  than  the  food-  itself.  It 
means  the  possibility  of  a life  which  is  a mere  ex- 


FAJ^ASITISM. 


345 


istence.  It  leaves  the  organism  in  statu  quo^  unde- 
veloped, immature,  low  in  the  scale  of  organization 
and  with  a growing  tendency  to  pass  from  the  state 
of  equilibrium  to  that  of  increasing  degeneration. 
What  an  organism  is  depends  upon  what  it  does  ; 
its  activities  make  it  And  if  the  stimulus  to  the 
exercise  of  all  the  innumerable  faculties  concerned 
in  nutrition  be  withdrawn  by  the  conditions  and  cir- 
cumstances of  life  becoming,  or  being  made  to 
become,  too  easy,  there  is  first  an  arrest  of  develop- 
ment, and  finally  a loss  of  the  parts  themselves.  If, 
in  short,  an  organism  does  nothing,  in  that  relation 
it  is  nothing. 

We  may,  therefore,  formulate  the  general  principle 
thus:  Any  principle  which  secures  food  to  the  in-^ 
dividual  without  the  expenditure  of  work  is  uijurious, 
and  accompanied  by  the  degeneratioti  a^id  loss  of  parts. 

The  social  and  political  analogies  of  this  law, 
which  have  been  casually  referred  to  already,  are 
sufficiently  familiar  to  render  any  further  develop- 
ment in  these  directions  superfluous.  After  the 
eloquent  preaching  of  the  Gospel  of  Work  by  Thomas 
Carlyle,  this  century  at  least  can  never  plead  that 
one  of  the  most  important  moral  bearings  of  the 
subject  has  not  been  duly  impressed  upon  it.  All 
that  can  be  said  of  idleness  generally  might  be  fitly 
urged  in  support  of  this  great  practical  truth  All 


S50 


PARASITISM. 


nations  which  have  prematurely  passed  away,  buried 
in  graves  dug  by  their  own  effeminacy ; all  those  in- 
dividuals who  have  secured  a hasty  wealth  by  the 
chances  of  speculation ; all  children  of  fortune ; all 
victims  of  inheritance  ; all  social  sponges ; all  satel- 
lites of  the  court ; all  beggars  of  the  market-place — 
all  these  are  living  and  unlying  witnesses  to  the 
unalterable  retributions  of  the  law  of  parasitism. 
But  it  is  when  we  come  to  study  the  working  of  the 
principle  in  the  religious  sphere  that  we  discover  the 
full  extent  of  the  ravages  which  the  parasitic  habit 
can  make  on  the  souls  of  men.  We  can  only  hope 
to  indicate  here  one  or  two  of  the  things  in  modern 
Christianity  which  minister  most  subtly  and  widely 
to  this  as  yet  all  but  unnamed  sin. 

We  begin  in  what  may  seem  a somewhat  unlooked- 
for  quarter.  One  of  the  things  in  the  religious  world 
which  tends  most  strongly  to  induce  the  parasitic 
habit  is  Going  to  Church.  Church-going  itself  every 
Christian  will  rightly  consider  an  invaluable  aid  to 
the  ripe  development  of  the  spiritual  life.  Public 
worship  has  a place  in  the  national  religious  life  so 
firmly  established  that  nothing  is  ever  likely  to  shake 
Its  influence.  So  supreme  indeed,  is  the  ecclesias- 
tical system  in  all  Christian  countries  that  with 
thousands  the  religion  of  the  Church  and  the  religion 
of  the  individual  are  one.  But  just  because  of  its 


PARASITISM. 


35* 


high  and  unique  place  in  religious  regard,  does  it 
become  men  from  time  to  time  to  inquire  how  far 
the  Church  is  really  ministering  to  the  spiritual  health 
of  the  immense  religious  community  which  looks  to 
it  as  its  foster-mother.  And  if  it  falls  to  us  here 
reluctantly  to  expose  some  secret  abuses  of  this 
venerable  system,  let  it  be  well  understood  that  these 
are  abuses,  and  not  that  the  sacred  institution  itself 
is  being  violated  by  the  attack  of  an  impious  hand. 

The  danger  of  church-going  largely  depends  on 
the  form  of  worship,  but  it  may  be  affirmed  that 
even  the  most  perfect  Church  affords  to  all  wor- 
shippers a greater  or  less  temptation  to  parasitism. 
It  consists  essentially  in  the  deputy-work  or  deputy- 
worship  inseparable  from  church  or  chapel  ministra- 
tions. One  man  is  set  apart  to  prepare  a certain 
amount  of  spiritual  truth  for  the  rest.  He,  if  he 
is  a true  man,  gets  all  the  benefits  of  original  work. 
He  finds  the  truth,  digests  it,  is  nourished  and  en- 
riched by  it  before  he  offers  it  to  his  flock.  To  a 
large  extent  it  will  nourish  and  enrich  in  turn  a 
number  of  his  hearers.  But  still  they  will  lack  some- 
thing. The  faculty  of  selecting  truth  at  first  hand 
and  appropriating  it  for  one’s  self  is  a lawful  posses- 
sion to  every  Christian.  Rightly  exercised  it  con- 
veys to  him  truth  in  its  freshest  form ; it  offers  him 
the  opportunity  of  verifying  doctrines  for  himself ; 


PA/^ASITISM. 


35a 

it  makes  religion  personal ; it  deepens  and  intensifies 
the  only  convictions  that  are  worth  deepening,  those, 
namely,  which  are  honest ; and  it  supplies  the  mind 
with  a basis  of  certainty  in  religion.  But  if  all  one’s 
truth  is  derived  by  imbibition  from  the  Church,  the 
faculties  for  receiving  truth  are  not  only  undeveloped 
but  one’s  whole  view  of  truth  becomes  distorted. 
He  who  abandons  the  personal  search  for  truth,  under 
whatever  pretext,  abandons  truth.  The  very  word 
truth,  by  becoming  the  limited  possession  of  a guild, 
ceases  to  have  any  meaning;  and  faith,  which  can 
only  be  founded  on  truth,  gives  way  to  credulity,* 
resting  on  mere  opinion. 

In  those  churches  especially  where  all  parts  of  the 
worship  are  subordinated  to  the  sermon,  this  species 
of  parasitism  is  peculiarly  encouraged.  What  is 
meant  to  be  a stimulus  to  thought  becomes  the  >sub- 
stitute  for  it.  The  hearer  never  really  learns,  he  only 
listens.  And  while  truth  and  knowledge  seem  to 
increase,  life  and  character  are  left  in  arrear.  Such, 
truth,  of  course,  and  such  knowledge,  are  a mere 
seeming.  Having  cost  nothing,  they  come  to 
nothing.  The  organism  acquires  a growing  immo- 
bility, and  finally  exists  in  a state  of  entire  intellec- 
tual helplessness  and  inertia.  So  the  parasitic 
Church-member,  the  literal  adherent,”  comes  not 
merely  to  live  only  within  the  circle  of  ideas  of  his 


PAJ^ASITISM. 


353 


minister,  but  to  be  content  that  his  minister  has 
these  ideas — like  the  literary  parasite  who  fancies  he 
knows  everything  because  he  has  a good  library. 

Where  the  worship,  again,  is  largely  liturgical  the 
danger  assumes  an  even  more  serious  form,  and  it 
acts  in  some  such  way  as  this.  Every  sincere  man 
who  sets  out  in  the  Christian  race  begins  by  at- 
tempting to  exercise  the  spiritual  faculties, for  him- 
self. The  young  life  throbs  in  his  veins,  and  he 
sets  himself  to  the  further  progress  with  earnest 
purpose  and  resolute  will.  For  a time  he  bids  fair 
to  attain  a high  and  original  development.  But 
the  temptation  to  relax  the  always  difficult  effort 
at  spirituality  is  greater  than  he  knows.  The 

“ carnal  mind  ” itself  is  “ enmity  against  God,”  and 
the  antipathy,  or  the  deadlier  apathy  within,  is 
unexpectedly  encouraged  from  that  very  outside 
source  from  which  he  anticipates  the  greatest  help. 
Connecting  himself  with  a Church  he  is  no  less 
interested  than  surprised  to  find  how  rich  is  the 
provision  there  for  every  part  of  his  spiritual  nature. 
Each  service  satisfies  or  surfeits.  Twice,  or  even 
three  times  a week,  this  feast  is  spread  for  him. 
The  thoughts  are  deeper  than  his  own,  the  faith 
keener,  the  worship  loftier,  the  whole  ritual  more 
reverent  and  splendid.  What  more  natural  than 
that  he  should  gradually  exchange  his  personal 


A A 


354 


PARASITISM, 


religion  for  that  of  the  congregation  ? What  more 
likely  than  that  a public  religion  should  by  in- 
sensible stages  supplant  his  individual  faith  ? What 
more  simple  than  to  content  himself  with  the  warmth 
of  another's  soul  ? What  more  tempting  than  to 
give  up  private  prayer  for  the  easier  worship  of  the 
liturgy  or  of  the  church  ? What,  in  short,  more 
natural  than  for  the  independent,  free-moving,  grow- 
ing Sacculina  to  degenerate  into  the  listless,  useless, 
pampered  parasite  of  the  pew  ? The  very  means 
he  takes  to  nurse  his  personal  religion  often  come 
in  time  to  wean  him  from  it.  Hanging  admiringly, 
or  even  enthusiastically,  on  the  lips  of  eloquence, 
his  senses  now  stirred  by  ceremony,  now  soothed 
by  music,  the  parasite  of  the  pew  enjoys  his  weekly 
worship — his  character  untouched,  his  will  unbraced, 
his  crude  soul  unquickened  and  unimproved.  Thus, 
instead  of  ministering  to  the  growth  of  individual 
members,  and  very  often  just  in  proportion  to  the 
superior  excellence  of  the  provisioi\  made  for  them 
by  another,  does  this  gigantic  system  of  deputy- 
nutrition  tend  to  destroy  development  and  arrest 
the  genuine  culture  of  the  soul.  Our  churches  over- 
flow with  members  who  are  mere  consumers.  Their 
interest  in  religion  is  purely  parasitic.  Their  only 
spiritual  exercise  is  the  automatic  one  of  imbibi- 
tion, the  clergyman  being  the  faithful  Hermit-crab 


PARASITISiM, 


355 


who  is  to  be  depended  on  every  Sunday  for  at 
least  a week’s  supply. 

A physiologist  would  describe  the  organism  re* 
suiting  from  such  a process  as  a case  of  ‘‘  arrested 
development.”  Instead  of  having  learned  to  prayj 
the  ecclesiastical  parasite  becomes  satisfied  with 
being  prayed  for.  His  transactions  with  the  Eternal 
are  effected  by  commission.  His  work  for  Christ 
is  done  by  a paid  deputy.  His  whole  life  is  a 
prolonged  indulgence  in  the  bounties  of  the  Church  ; 
and  surely — in  some  cases  at  least  the  crowning 
irony — he  sends  for  the  minister  when  he  lies  down 
to  die. 

Other  signs  and  consequences  of  this  species  of 
parasitism  soon  become  very  apparent.  The  first 
symptom  is  idleness.  When  a Church  is  off  its 
true  diet  it  is  off  its  true  work.  Hence  one  ex- 
planation of  the  hundreds  of  large  and  influential 
congregations  ministered  to  from  week  to  week  by 
men  of  eminent  learning  and  earnestness,  which 
yet  do  little  or  nothing  in  the  line  of  these  special 
activities  for  which  all  churches  exist.  An  out- 
standing man  at  the  head  of  a huge,  useless  and 
torpid  congregation  is  always  a puzzle.  But  is  the 
reason  not  this,  that  the  congregation  gets  too  good 
food  too  cheap?  Providence  has  mercifully  de- 
livered the  Church  from  too  ma  ay  great  men  in 


PARASITISM, 


556 

her  pulpits,  but  there  are  enough  in  every  country- 
side to  play  the  host  disastrously  to  a large  circle 
of  otherwise  able-bodied  Christian  people,  who, 
thrown  on  their  own  resources,  might  fatten  them- 
selves and  help  others.  There  are  compensations 
to  a flock  for  a poor  minister  after  all.  Where 
the  fare  is  indifferent  those  who  are  really  hungry 
will  exert  themselves  to  procure  their  own  supply. 

That  the  Church  has  indispensable  functions  to 
discharge  to  the  individual  is  not  denied  ; but  taking 
into  consideration  the  universal  tendency  to  para- 
sitism in  the  human  soul  it  is  a grave  question 
whether  in  some  cases  it  does  not  really  effect 
more  harm  than  good.  A dead  church  certainly, 
a church  having  no  reaction  on  the  community, 
a church  without  propagative  power  in  the  world, 
cannot  be  other  than  a calamity  to  all  within  its 
borders.  Such  a church  is  an  institution,  first  for 
making,  then  for  screening  parasites  ; and  instead 
of  representing  to  the  world  the  Kingdom  of  God 
on  earth,  it  is  despised  alike  by  godly  and  by 
godless  men  as  the  refuge  for  fear  and  formalism 
and  the  nursery  of  superstition. 

And  this  suggests  a second  and  not  less  practical 
evi]  of  a parasitic  piety — that  it  presents  to  the  world 
a false  conception  of  the  religion  of  Christ.  One 
notices  with  a frequency  which  may  well  excite  alarm 


PARASITISM. 


3^7 


that  the  children  of  church-going  parents  often  break 
away  as  they  grow  in  intelligence,  not  only  from 
church-connection  but  from  the  whole  system  of 
family  religion.  In  some  cases  this  is  doubtless  due 
to  natural  perversity,  but  in  others  it  certainly  arises 
from  the  hollowness  of  the  outward  forms  which  pass 
current  in  society  and  at  home  for  vital  Christianity. 
These  spurious  forms,  fortunately  or  unfortunately, 
soon  betray  themselves.  How  little  there  is  in  them 
becomes  gradually  apparent.  And  rather  than  in- 
dulge in  a sham  the  budding  sceptic,  as  the  first  step, 
parts  with  the  form  and  in  nine  cases  out  of  ten 
concerns  himself  no  further  to  find  a substitute. 
Quite  deliberately,  quite  honestly,  sometimes  with 
real  regret  and  even  at  personal  sacrifice  he  takes  up 
his  position,  and  to  his  parent's  sorrow  and  his 
church's  dishonour  forsakes  for  ever  the  faith  and 
religion  of  his  fathers.  Who  will  deny  that  this  is  a 
true  account  of  the  natural  history  of  much  modern 
scepticism  } A formal  religion  can  never  hold  its 
own  in  the  nineteenth  century.  It  is  better  that  it 
should  not.  We  must  either  be  real  or  cease  to 
We  must  either  give  up  our  Parasitism  or  our  sons. 

Any  one  who  will  take  the  trouble  to  investigate 
a number  of  cases  where  whole  families  of  c'Jtwardly 
godly  parents  have  gone  astray,  will  probably  find 
that  the  household  religion  had  either  some  palpable 


358 


PARASITISM. 


defect,  or  belonged  essentially  to  the  parasitic  order. 

% 

The  popular  belief  that  the  sons  of  clergymen  turn 
out  worse  than  those  of  the  laity  is,  of  course,  with- 
out foundation  ; but  it  may  also  probably  be  verified 
that  in  the  instances  where  clergymen’s  sons  noto- 
riously discredit  their  father’s  ministry,  that  ministry 
in  a majority  of  cases,  will  be  found  to  be  professional 
and  theological  rather  than  human  and  spiritual. 
Sequences  in  the  moral  and  spiritual  world  follow 
more  closely  than  we  yet  discern  the  great  law  of 
Heredity.  The  Parasite  begets  the  Parasite — only  in 
the  second  generation  the  offspring  are  sometimes 
sufficiently  wise  to  make  the  discovery,  and  honeet 
enough  to  proclaim  it. 

We  now  pass  on  to  the  consideration  of  another 
form  of  Parasitism  which,  though  closely  related  to 
that  just  discussed,  is  of  sufficient  importance  to 
justify  a separate  reference.  Appealing  to  a some- 
what smaller  circle,  but  affecting  it  not  less  dis- 
astrously, is  the  Parasitism  induced  by  certain  abuses 
of  Systems  of  Theology. 

In  its  own  place,  of  course.  Theology  is  no  more 
to  be  dispensed  with  than  the  Church.  In  every 
perfect  religious  system  three  great  departments 
must  always  be  represented — criticism,  dogmatism, 
and  evangelism.  Without  the  first  there  is  no 
guarantee  of  truth,  without  the  second  no  defence 


PARASITISM, 


359 


of  truth,  arid  without  the  third  no  propagation  o< 
truth.  But  when  these  departments  become  mixed 
up,  when  their  separate  functions  are  forgotten,  when 
one  is  made  to  do  duty  for  another,  or  where  either 
is  developed  by  the  church  or  the  individual  at  the 
expense  of  the  rest,  the  result  is  fatal.  The  particular 
abuse,  however,  of  w^hich  we  have  now  to  speak, 
concerns  the  tendency  in  orthodox  communities, 
first  to  exalt  orthodoxy  above  all  other  elements  in 
religion,  and  secondly  to  make  the  possession  of 
sound  beliefs  equivalent  to  the  possession  of  truth. 

Doctrinal  preaching,  fortunately,  as  a constant 
practice  is  less  in  vogue  than  in  a former  age,  but 
there  are  still  large  numbers  whose  only  contact  with 
religion  is  through  theological  forms.  The  method  is 
supported  by  a plausible  defence.  What  is  doctrine 
but  a compressed  form  of  truth,  systematised  by  able 
and  pious  men,  and  sanctioned  by  the  imprimatur  of 
the  Church  ? If  the  greatest  minds  of  the  Church’s 
past,  having  exercised  themselves  profoundly  upon 
the  problems  of  religion,  formulated  as  with  one  voice 
a system  of  doctrine,  why  should  the  humble  in- 
quirer not  gratefully  accept  it  ? Why  go  over  the 
ground  again  t Why  with  his  dim  light  should  he 
betake  himself  afresh  to  Bible  study  and  with  so 
great  a body  of  divinity  already  compiled,  presume 
himself  to  be  still  a seeker  after  truth?  Does  not 


PARASITISM. 


.^6o 

Theology  give  him  Bible  truth  in  reliable,  convenient! 
and  moreover,  in  logical  propositions  ? There  it  lies 
extended  to  the  last  detail  in  the  tomes  of  the 
Fathers,  or  abridged  in  a hundred  modern  compendia, 
ready-made  to  his  hand,  all  cut  and  dry,  guaranteed 
sound  and  wholesome,  why  not  use  it  ? 

Just  because  it  is  all  cut  and  dry.  Just  because  it 
is  ready-made.  Just  because  it  lies  there  in  reliable, 
convenient  and  logical  propositions.  The  moment 
you  appropriate  truth  in  such  a shape  you  appro- 
priate a form.  You  cannot  cut  and  dry  truth.  You 
cannot  accept  truth  ready-made  without  it  ceasing  to 
nourish  the  soul  as  truth.  You  cannot  live  on  theo- 
logical forms  without  becoming  a Parasite  and  ceasing 
to  be  a man. 

There  is  no  worse  enemy  to  a living  Church  than 
a propositional  theology,  with  the  latter  controlling 
the  former  by  traditional  authority.  For  one  does 
not  then  receive  the  truth  for  himself,  he  accepts  it 
bodily.  He  begins  the  Christian  life  set  up  by  his 
Church  with  a stock-in-trade  which  has  cost  him 
nothing,  and  which,  though  it  may  serve  him  all  his 
life,  is  just  exactly  worth  as  much  as  his  belief  in  his 
Church.  This  possession  of  truth,  moreover,  thus 
lightly  won,  is  given  to  him  as  infallible.  It  is  a 
system.  There  is  nothing  to  add  to  it.  At  his  peril 
le^  him  question  or  take  from  it.  To  start  a convert 


PARASITISM. 


3«>i 

*n  life  with  such  a principle  is  unspeakably  degrading, 
All  through  life  instead  of  working  towards  truth 
he  must  work  from  it.  An  infallible  standard  is 
a temptation  to  a mechanical  faith.  Infallibility 
always  paralyses.  It  gives  rest ; but  it  is  the  rest 
of  stagnation.  Men  perform  one  great  act  of  faith 
at  the  beginning  of  their  life,  then  have  done  with  it 
for  ever.  All  moral,  intellectual  and  spiritual  effort 
is  over ; and  a cheap  theology  ends  in  a cheap  life. 

The  same  thing  that  makes  men  take  refuge  in 
the  Church  of  Rome  makes  them  take  refuge  in 
a set  of  dogmas.  Infallibility  meets  the  deepest 
desire  of  man,  but  meets  it  in  the  most  fatal  form. 
Men  deal  with  the  hunger  after  truth  in  two  ways. 
First  by  Unbelief — which  crushes  it  by  blind  force ; 
or,  secondly,  by  resorting  to  some  external  source 
credited  with  Infallibility — which  lulls  it  to  sleep 
by  blind  faith.  The  effect  of  a doctrinal  theology 
IS  the  effect  of  Infallibility.  And  the  wholesale 
belief  in  such  a system,  however  accurate  it  may 
be — grant  even  that  it  were  infallible — is  not  Faith 
though  it  always  gets  that  name.  It  is  mere 
Credulity.  It  is  a complacent  and  idle  rest  upon 
authority,  not  a hard-earned,  self-obtained,  personal 
possession.  The  moral  responsibility  here,  besides 
is  reduced  to  nothing.  Those  who  framed  the 
Thirty-nine  Articles  or  the  Westminster  Confession 


362 


PARASITISM. 


are  responsible.  And  anything  which  destroys  re- 
sponsibility, or  transfers  it,  cannot  be  other  than 
injurious  in  its  moral  tendency  and  useless  in  it- 
self. 

It  may  be  objected  perhaps  that  this  statement 
of  the  paralysis  spiritual  and  mental  induced  by 
Infallibility  applies  also  to  the  Bible.  The  answer 
is  that  though  the  Bible  is  infallible,  the  Infallibility 
is  not  in  such  a form  as  to  become  a temptation. 
There  is  the  widest  possible  difference  between  the 
form  of  truth  in  the  Bible  and  the  form  in  the- 
ology. 

In  theology  truth  is  propositional — tied  up  in 
neat  parcels,  systematized,  and  arranged  in  logical 
order.  The  Trinity  is  an  intricate  doctrinal  pro- 
blem. The  Supreme  Being  is  discussed  in  terms  of 
philosophy.  The  Atonement  is  a formula  which  is 
to  be  demonstrated  like  a proposition  in  Euclid. 
And  Justification  is  to  be  worked  out  as  a question 
of  jurisprudence.  There  is  no  necessary  connection 
between  these  doctrines  and  the  life  of  him  who 
holds  them.  They  make  him  orthodox,  not  neces- 
sarily righteous.  They  satisfy  the  intellect  but  need 
»aot  touch  the  heart.  It  does  not,  in  short,  take  a 
religious  man  to  be  a theologian.  It  simply  takes 
a man  with  fair  reasoning  powers.  This  man  hap- 
pens to  apply  these  powers  to  theological  subjects 


PARASITISM. 


36^ 


- — but  in  no  other  sense  than  he  might  apply  them 
to  astronomy  or  physics.  But  truth  in  the  Bible 
is  a fountain.  It  is  a diffused  nutriment,  so  diffused 
that  no  one  can  put  himself  off  with  the  form.  It 
is  reached  not  by  thinking,  but  by  doing.  It  is 
seen,  discerned,  not  demonstrated.  It  cannot  be 
bolted  whole,  but  must  be  slowly  absorbed  into  the 
system.  Its  vagueness  to  the  mere  intellect,  its 
refusal  to  be  packed  into  portable  phrases,  its  satis- 
fying unsatisfyingness,  its  vast  atmosphere,  its  find- 
ing of  us,  its  mystical  hold  of  us,  these  are  the 
tokens  of  its  infinity. 

Nature  never  provides  for  man’s  wants  in  any 
direction,  bodily,  mental,  or  spiritual,  in  such  a 
form  as  that  he  can  simply  accept  her  gifts  auto- 
matically. She  puts  all  the  mechanical  powers  at 
his  disposal — but  he  must  make  his  lever.  She 
gives  him  corn,  but  he  must  grind  it.  She  elabo- 
rates coal,  but  he  must  dig  for  it.  Corn  is  perfect, 
all  the  products  of  Nature  are  perfect,  but  he  has 
everything  to  do  to  them  before  he  can  use  them. 
So  with  truth  ; it  is  perfect,  infallible.  But  he  can- 
not use  it  as  it  stands.  He  must  work,  think, 
separate,  dissolve,  absorb,  digest ; and  most  of  these 
he  must  do  for  himself  and  within  himself.  If  it  be 
replied  that  this  is  exactly  what  theology  does,  iVe 
answer  it  is  exactly  what  it  does  not.  It  simply 


364 


PARASITISM, 


does  what  the  greengrocer  does  when  he  arranges 
his  apples  and  plums  in  his  shop  window.  He  may 
tell  me  a magnum  bonum  from  a Victoria,  or  a 
Baldwin  from  a Newtown  Pippin.  But  he  does  not 
help  me  to  eat  it.  His  information  is  useful,  and 
for  scientific  horticulture  essential.  Should  a scepti- 
cal pomologist  deny  that  there  was  such  a thing  as 
a Baldwin,  or  mistake  it  for  a Newtown  Pippin,  we 
should  be  glad  to  refer  to  him  ; but  if  we  were 
hungry,  and  an  orchard  were  handy,  we  should  not 
trouble  him.  Truth  in  the  Bible  is  an  orchard 
rather  than  a museum.  Dogmatism  will  be  very 
valuable  to  us  when  scientific  necessity  makes  us 
go  to  the  museum.  Criticism  will  be  very  useful 
in  seeing  that  only  fruit- bearers  grow  in  the  orchard. 
But  truth  in  the  doctrinal  form  is  not  natural,  pro- 
per, assimilable  food  for  the  soul  of  man. 

Is  this  a plea  then  for  doubt } Yes,  for  that 
philosophic  doubt  which  is  the  evidence  of  a faculty 
doing  its  own  work.  It  is  more  necessary  for  us 
to  be  active  than  to  be  orthodox.  To  be  orthodox 
is  what  we  wish  to  be,  but  we  can  only  truly  reach 
it  by  being  honest,  by  being  original,  by  seeing 
with  our  own  eyes,  by  believing  with  our  own  heart 
An  idle  life,’' says  Goethe,  ‘Hs  death  anticipated.” 
Better  far  be  burned  at  the  stake  of  Public  Opinion 
than  die  the  living  death  of  Parasitism.  Better  an 


PARASITISM. 


365 


aberrant  theology  than  a suppressed  organizatioa 
Better  a little  faith  dearly  won,  better  launched 
alone  on  the  infinite  bewilderment  of  Truth,  than 
perish  on  the  splendid  plenty  of  the  richest  creeds. 
Such  Doubt  is  no  self-willed  presumption.  Nor, 
truly  exercised,  will  it  prove  itself,  as  much  doubt 
does,  the  synonym  for  sorrow.  It  aims  at  a life- 
long learning,  prepared  for  any  sacrifice  of  will  yet 
for  none  of  independence  ; at  that  high  progressive 
education  which  yields  rest  in  work  and  work  in 
rest,  and  the  development  of  immortal  faculties  in 
both ; at  that  deeper  faith  which  believes  in  the 
vastness  and  variety  of  the  revelations  of  God,  and 
their  accessibility  to  all  obedient  hearts. 


CLASSIFICATION. 


judge  oj  int  otucf  of  the  worlds  although  I know  not  tts 
end,  because  to  judge  of  this  order  I only  need  mutually  to  com- 
pare the  parts,  to  study  their  functions,  their  relations,  and  to 
reinark  their  concert.  I know  not  why  the  universe  exists,  but 
I do  not  desist  from  seeing  how  it  is  modified;  I do  not  cease  to 
see  the  inthnate  agreement  by  which  the  beings  that  compose  it 
render  a jnutual  help.  I am  like  a man  who  should  see  for  the 
first  time  an  open  watch,  who  should  not  cease  to  adjnire  the 
workmanship  of  it,  although  he  knows  not  the  use  of  tlu 
machine,  a7td  had  7iever  seen  dials.  I do  not  know,  he  would 
say,  what  all  this  is  for,  but  I see  that  each  piece  is  made  for  the 
others;  I admire  the  worker  in  the  detail  of  his  work,  and  I a?n 
very  sure  that  all  these  wheelworks  only  go  thus  in  concert  for  a 
common  end  which  I cannot  perceivel^ 


Rousseau. 


CLASSIFICATION. 


• That  which  is  born  of  the  flesh  is  flesh  ; and  that  which  ia 
bom  of  the  Spirit  is  spirit.” — Christ, 

“In  early  attempts  to  arrange  organic  beings  in  some  syste- 
matic manner,  we  see  at  first  a guidance  by  conspicuous  and 
simple  characters,  and  a tendency  towards  arrangement  in 
linear  order.  In  successively  later  attempts,  we  see  more  re- 
gard paid  to  combinations  of  character  which  are  essential  but 
often  inconspicuous ; and  a gradual  abandonment  of  a linear 
arrangement.” — Herbert  Spencer, 

On  one  of  the  shelves  in  a certain  museum  lie  two 
small  boxes  filled  with  earth.  A low  mountain  in 
Arran  has  furnished  the  first ; the  contents  of  the 
second  came  from  the  Island  of  Barbadoes.  When 
examined  with  a pocket  lens,  the  Arran  earth  is 
found  to  be  full  of  small  objects,  clear  as  crystal, 
fashioned  by  some  mysterious  geometry  into  forms 
of  exquisite  symmetry.  The  substance  is  silica,  a 
natural  glass  ; and  the  prevailing  shape  is  a six* 
sided  prism  capped  at  either  end  by  little  pyramids 
modelled  with  consummate  grace. 

When  the  second  specimen  is  examined,  the 
revelation  is,  if  possible,  more  surprising.  Here, 


B B 


370 


CLASSIFJCA  TION. 


also,  is  a vast  assemblage  of  small  glassy  or  per* 
cellanous  objects  built  up  into  curious  forms.  The 
material,  chemically,  remains  the  same,  but  the 
angles  of  pyramid  and  prism  have  given  place  to 
curved  lines,  so  that  the  contour  is  entirely  different 
The  appearance  is  that  of  a vast  collection  of  mi- 
croscopic urns,  goblets,  and  vases,  each  richly  orna- 
mented with  small  sculptured  discs  or  perforations 
which  are  disposed  over  the  pure  white  surface  in 
regular  belts  and  rows.  Each  tiny  urn  is  chiselled 
into  the  most  faultless  proportion,  and  the  whole 
presents  a vision  of  magic  beauty. 

Judged  by  the  standard  of  their  loveliness  there 
is  little  to  choose  between  these  two  sets  of  objects. 
Yet  there  is  one  cardinal  difference  between  them. 
They  belong  to  different  worlds.  The  last  belong 
to  the  living  world,  the  former  to  the  dead.  The 
first  are  crystals,  the  last  are  shells. 

No  power  on  earth  can  make  these  little  urns  of 
the  PolycystincB  except  Life.  We  can  melt  them 
down  in  the  laboratory,  but  no  ingenuity  of  chem* 
istry  can  reproduce  their  sculptured  forms.  We  are 
sure  that  Life  has  formed  them,  however,  for  tiny 
creatures  allied  to  those  which  made  the  Barbadoes* 
earth  are  living  still,  fashioning  their  fairy  palaces 
of  flint  in  the  same  mysterious  way  On  the  other 
hand,  chemistry  has  no  difficulty  in  making  these 


CLASSIFICA  TION. 


371 


crystals.  We  can  melt  down  this  Arran  earth  and 
reproduce  the  pyramids  and  prisms  in  endless  num- 
bers. Nay,  if  we  do  melt  it  down,  we  cannot  help 
reproducing  the  pyramid  and  the  prism.  There  is 
a six-sidedness,  as  it  were,  in  the  very  nature  pf  this 
substance  which  will  infallibly  manifest  itself  if  the 
crystaHizing  substance  only  be  allowed  fair  play. 
This  six-sided  tendency  is  its  Law  of  Crystallization 
— a law  of  its  nature  which  it  cannot  resist.  But 
in  the  crystal  there  is  nothing  at  all  corresponding 
to  Life.  There  is  simply  an  inherent  force  which 
can  be  called  into  action  at  any  moment,  and  which 
cannot  be  separated  from  the  particles  in  which  it 
resides.  The  crystal  may  be  ground  to  pieces,  but 
this  force  remains  intact.  And  even  after  being  re- 
duced to  powder,  and  running  the  gauntlet  of  every 
process  in  the  chemical  laboratory,  the  moment  the 
substance  is  left  to  itself  under  possible  conditions 
it  will  proceed  to  recrystallize  anew.  But  if  the 
Polycystine  urn  be  broken,  no  inorganic  agency  can 
build  it  up  again.  So  far.  as  any  inherent  urn- 
building power,  analogous  to  the  crystalline  force,  is 
concerned,  it  might  lie  there  in  a shapeless  mass  for 
ever.  That  which  modelled  it  at  first  is  gone  from 
it  It  was  Vital ; while  the  force  which  built  the 
crystal  was  only  Molecular. 

From  an  artistic  point  of  view  this  distinction  is 


372 


CLASSIFICA  TION. 


of  small  importance.  ^Esthetically,  the  Law  ol 
Crystallization  is  probably  as  useful  in  ministering 
to  natural  beauty  as  Vitality.  What  are  more 
beautiful  than  the  crystals  of  a snowflake?  Oi 
what  frond  of  fern  or  feather  of  bird  can  vie  with 
the  tracery  of  the  frost  upon  a window-pane  ? Can 
it  be  said  that  the  lichen  is  more  lovely  than  the 
striated  crystals  of  the  granite  on  which  it  grows, 
or  the  moss  on  the  mountain  side  more  satisfying 
than  the  hidden  amethyst  and  cairngorm  in  the 
rock  beneath  ? Or  is  the  botanist  more  astonished 
when  his  microscope  reveals  the  architecture  of  spiral 
tissue  in  the  stem  of  a plant,  or  the  mineralogist  who 
beholds  for  the  first  time  the  chaos  of  beauty  in  the 
sliced  specimen  of  some  common  stone  ? So  far  as 
beauty  goes  the  organic  world  and  the  inorganic  are 
one. 

To  the  man  of  science,  however,  this  identity  of 

beauty  signifies  nothing.  His  concern,  in  the  first 

instance,  is  not  with  the  forms  but  with  the  natures 

of  things.  It  is  no  valid  answer  to  him,  when  he 

asks  the  difference  between  the  moss  and  the  cairn- 

% 

gorni,  the  frost-work  and  the  fern,  to  be  assured  that 
both  are  beautiful.  For  no  fundamental  distinction 
in  Science  depends  upon  beauty.  He  wants  an 
answer  in  terms  of  chemistry,  are  they  organic  or 
inorganic?  or  in  terms  of  biology,  are  they  living 


CLASSIFICA  TION. 


373 


or  dead  ? But  when  he  is  told  that  the  one  is  living 
and  the  other  dead,  he  is  in  possession  of  a cha- 
racteristic and  fundamental  scientific  distinction. 
From  this  point  of  view,  however  much  they  may 
possess  in  common  of  material  substance  and  beauty, 
they  are  separated  from  one  another  by  a wide  and 
unbridged  gulf.  The  classification  of  these  forms, 
therefore,  depends  upon  the  standpoint,  and  we 
should  pronounce  them  like  or  unlike,  related  or 
unrelated,  according  as  we  judged  them  from  the 
point  of  view  of  Art  or  of  Science. 

The  drift  of  these  introductory  paragraphs  must 
already  be  apparent.  We  propose  to  inquire  whether 
among  men,  clothed  apparently  with  a common 
beauty  of  character,  there  may  not  yet  be  distinctions 
as  radical  as  between  the  crystal  and  the  shell ; and, 
further,  whether  the  current  classification  of  men, 
based  upon  Moral  Beauty,  is  wholly  satisfactory 
either  from  the  standpoint  of  Science  or  of  Christian- 
ity. Here,  for  example,  are  two  characters,  pure  and 
elevated,  adorned  with  conspicuous  virtues,  stirred  by 
lofty  impulses,  and  commanding  a spontaneous  ad- 
miration from  all  who  look  on  them — may  not  this 
similarity  of  outward  form  be  accompanied  by  a 
total  dissimilarity  of  inward  nature  ? Is  the  exter- 
nal appearance  the  truest  criterion  of  the  ultimate 
nature } Or,  as  in  the  crystal  and  the  shell,  may  there 


374 


CLASSIFICA  TION. 


not  exist  distinctions  more  profound  and  basal  ? The 
distinctions  drawn  between  men,  in  short,  are  com- 
monly based  on  the  outward  appearance  of  goodness 
or  badness,  on  the  ground  of  moral  beauty  or  moral 
deformity — is  this  classification  scientific  ? Or  is 
there  a deeper  distinction  between  the  Christian  and 
the  not-a-Christian  as  fundamental  as  that  between 
the  organic  and  the  inorganic  ? 

There  can  be  little  doubt,  to  begin  with,  that  with 
the  great  majority  of  people  religion  is  regarded  as 
essentially  one  with  morality.  Whole  schools  of 
philosophy  have  treated  the  Christian  Religion  as  a 
question  of  beauty,  and  discussed  its  place  aniong 
other  systems  of  ethic.  Even  those  systems  of  theo- 
logy which  profess  to  draw  a deeper  distinction  have 
rarely  succeeded  in  establishing  it  upon  any  valid 
basis,  or  seem  even  to  have  made  that  distinction 
perceptible  to  others.  So  little,  indeed,  has  the 
rationale  of  the  science  of  religion  been  understood 
that  there  is  still  no  more  unsatisfactory  province 
in  theology  than  where  morality  and  religion  are 
contrasted,  and  the  adjustment  attempted  between 
moral  philosophy  and  what  are  known  as  the  doc- 
trines of  grace. 

Examples  of  this  confusion  are  so  numerous  that 
if  one  were  to  proceed  to  proof  he  would  have  to 
cite  almost  the  entire  European  philosophy  of  the 


CLASSIFICA  TION, 


375 


last  three  hundred  years.  From  Spinoza  down- 
waid  through  the  whole  naturalistic  school,  Moral 
Beauty  is  persistently  regarded  as  synonymous  with 
religion  and  the  spiritual  life.  The  .most  earnest 
thinking  of  the  present  day  is  steeped  in  the  same 
confusion.  We  have  even  the  remarkable  spectacle 
presented  to  us  just  now  of  a sublime  Morality- 
Religion  divorced  from  Christianity  altogether,  and 
wedded  to  the  baldest  form  of  materialism.  It  is 
claimed,  moreover,  that  the  moral  scheme  of  this 
high  atheism  is  loftier  and  more  perfect  than 
that  of  Christianity,  and  men  are  asked  to  take 
their  choice  as  if  the  morality  were  everything,  the 
Christianity  or  the  atheism  which  nourished  it  being 
neither  here  nor  there.  Others,  again,  studying  this 
moral  beauty  carefully,  have  detected  a something 
in  its  Christian  forms  which  has  compelled  them  to 
declare  that  a distinction  certainly  exists.  But  in 
scarcely  a single  instance  is  the  gravity  of  the  dis- 
tinction more  than  dimly  apprehended.  Few  con- 
ceive of  it  as  other  than  a difference  of  degree,  or 
could  give  a more  definite  account  of  it  than  Mr. 
Matthew  Arnold's  “ Religion  is  morality  touched  by 
Emotion" — an  utterance  significant  mainly  as  the 
testimonj  of  an  acute  mind  that  a distinction  oi 
some  kind  does  exist.  In  a recent  Symposium, 
where  the  question  as  to  “ The  influence  upon 


376 


CLASSIFICA  TION. 


Morality  of  a decline  in  Religious  Belief,”  was  dis- 
cussed at  length  by  writers  of  whom  this  century 
is  justly  proud,  there  appears  scarcely  so  much  as 
a recognition  of  the  fathomless  chasm  separating  the 
leading  terms  of  debate. 

If  beauty  is  the  criterion  of  religion,  this  view 
of  the  relation  of  religion  to  morality  is  justified 
But  what  if  there  be  the  same  difference  in  the 
beauty  of  two  separate  characters  that  there  is 
between  the  mineral  and  the  shell  ? What  if  there 
be  a moral  beauty  and  a spiritual  beauty?  What 
answer  shall  we  get  if  we  demand  a more  scientific 
distinction  between  characters  than  that  based  on 
mere  outward  form  ? It  is  not  enough  from  the 
standpoint  of  biological  religion  to  say  of  two 
characters  that  both  are  beautiful.  For,  again,  no 
fundamental  distinction  in  Science  depends  upon 
beauty.  We  ask  an  answer  in  terms  of  biology, 
are  they  flesh  or  spirit ; are  they  living  or  dead  ? 

If  this  is  really  a scientific  question,  if  it  is  a 
question  not  of  moral  philosophy  only,  but  of 
biology,  we  are  compelled  to  repudiate  beauty  as 
the  criterion  of  spirituality.  It  is  not,  of  course, 
meant  by  this  that  spirituality  is  not  morally 
beautiful.  Spirituality  must  be  morally  very  beau- 
tiful— so  much  so  that  popularly  one  is  justified  in 
judging  of  religion  by  its  beauty.  Nor  is  it  meant 


CLASSIFICA  TION, 


377 


that  morality  is  not  a criterion.  All  that  is  con 
tended  for  is  that,  from  the  scientific  standpoint,  it 
is  not  iJie  criterion.  We  can  judge  of  the  crystal 
and  the  shell  from  many  other  standpoints  besides 
those  named,  each  classification  having  an  import- 
ance in  its  own  sphere.  Thus  we  might  class  them 
according  to  their  size  and  weight,  their  percentage 
of  silica,  their  use  in  the  arts,  or  their  commercial 
value.  Each  science  or  art  is  entitled  to  regard 
them  from  its  own  point  of  view  ; and  when  the 
biologist  announces  his  classification  he  does  not 
interfere  with  those  based  on  other  grounds.  Only, 
having  chosen  his  standpoint,  he  is  bound  to  frame 
his  classification  in  terms  of  it. 

It  may  be  well  to  state  emphatically,  that  in 
proposing  a new  classification — or  rather,  in  reviving 
the  primitive  one — in  the  spiritual  sphere  we  leave 
untouched,  as  of  supreme  value  in  its  own  province, 
the  test  of  morality.  Morality  is  certainly  a test 
of  religion — for  most  practical  purposes  the  very 
best  test.  And  so  far  from  tending  to  depreciate 
morality,  the  bringing  into  prominence  of  the  true 
basis  is  entirely  in  its  interests — in  the  interests 
of  a moral  beauty,  indeed,  infinitely  surpassing  the 
highest  attainable  perfection  on  merely  natura' 
lines. 

The  warrant  for  seeking  a further  classification 


378 


CLASSIFICA  TION. 


is  twofold.  It  is  a principle  in  science  that  classifi- 
cation should  rest  on  the  most  basal  characteristics. 
To  determine  what  these  are  may  not  always  be 
easy,  but  it  is  at  least  evident  that  a classification 
framed  on  the  ultimate  nature  of  organisms  must 
be  more  distinctive  than  one  based  on  external 
characters.  Before  the  principles  of  classification 
were  understood,  organisms  were  invariably  arranged 
according  to  some  merely  external  resemblance. 
Thus  plants  were  classed  according  to  size  as  Herbs, 
Shrubs,  and  Trees;  and  animals  according  to  their 
appearance  as  Birds,  Beasts,  and  Fishes.  The  Bat 
upon  this  principle  was  a bird,  the  Whale  a fish  ; 
and  so  thoroughly  artificial  were  these  early  systems 
that  animals  were  often  tabulated  among  the  plants, 
and  plants  among  the  animals.  In  early  attempts,” 
says  Herbert  Spencer,  ‘^to  arrange  organic  beings 
in  some  systematic  manner,  we  see  at  first  a 
guidance  by  conspicuous  and  simple  characters,  and 
a tendency  towards  arrangement  in  linear  order.  In 
successively  later  attempts,  we  see  more  regard  paid 
to  combinations  of  characters  which  are  essential 
but  often  inconspicuous ; and  a gradual  abandon- 
ment of  a linear  arrangement  for  an  arrangement 
m divergent  groups  and  re-divergent  sub-groups.^ 


* “ Principles  of  Biology, p.  294. 


CLASSIFICA  TION, 


379 


Almost  all  the  natural  sciences  have  already  passed 
through  these  stages  ; and  one  or  two  which  rested 
entirely  on  external  characters  have  all  but  ceased 
to  exist — Conchology,  for  example,  which  has 
yielded  its  place  to  Malacology.  Following  in  the 
wake  of  the  other  sciences,  the  classifications  of 
Theology  may  have  to  be  remodelled  in  the  same 
way.  The  popular  classification,  whatever  its  merits 
from  a practical  point  of  view,  is  essentially  a clas- 
sification based  on  Morphology.  The  whole  ten< 
dency  of  science  now  is  to  include  along  with 
morphological  considerations  the  profounder  general- 
isations of  Physiology  and  Embryology.  And  the 
contribution  of  the  latter  science  especially  has  been 
found  so  important  that  biology  henceforth  must 
look  for  its  classification  largely  to  Embryological 
characters. 

But  apart  from  the  demand  of  modern  scientific 
culture  it  is  palpably  foreign  to  Christianity,  not 
merely  as  a Philosophy  but  as  a Biology,  to  classify 
men  only  in  terms  of  the  former.  And  it  is  some- 
what remarkable  that  the  writers  of  both  the  Old 
and  New  Testaments  seem  to  have  recognised  the 
deeper  basis.  The  favourite  classification  of  the 
Old  Testament  was  into  ‘‘the  nations  which  knew 
God  ” and  “ the  nations  which  knew  not  God  — a 
distinction  which  we  have  formerly  seen  to  be,  at 


380 


CLASSIFICA  TION. 


bottom,  biological.  In  the  New  Testament  again 
the  ethical  characters  are  more  prominent,  but  the 
cardinal  distinctions  based  on  regeneration,  if  not 
always  actually  referred  to,  are  throughout  kept  in 
view,  both  in  the  sayings  of  Christ  and  in  the 
Epistles. 

What  then  is  the  deeper  distinction  drawn  by 
Christianity?  What  is  the  essential  difference  be- 
tween the  Christian  and  the  not-a-Christian,  between 
the  spiritual  beauty  and  the  moral  beauty  ? It  is 
the  distinction  between  the  Organic  and  the  In- 
organic. Moral  beauty  is  the  product  of  the  natural 
man,  spiritual  beauty  of  the  spiritual  man.  And 
these  two,  according  to  the  law  of  Biogenesis,  are 
separated  from  one  another  by  the  deepest  line 
known  to  Science.  This  Law  is  at  once  the  founda- 
tion of  Biology  and  of  Spiritual  religion.  And  the 
whole  fabric  of  Christianity  falls  into  confusion  if 
we  attempt  to  ignore  it.  The  Law  of  Biogenesis, 
in  fact,  is  to  be  regarded  as  the  equivalent  in 
biology  of  the  First  Law  of  Motion  in  physics : 
Every  body  continues  in  its  state  of  rest  or  of  uniform 
motion  in  a straight  line^  except  in  so  far  as  it  is 
compelled  by  forces  to  change  that  state.  The  first 
Law  of  biology  is:  That  which  is  Mineral  is 

Mineral ; that  which  is  Flesh  is  Flesh  ; that  which 
is  Spirit  is  Spirit.  The  mineral  remains  in  the 


CLASSIFICA  TION. 


381 


inorganic  world  until  it  is  seized  upon  by  a some- 
thing called  Life  outside  the  inorganic  world ; the 
natural  man  remains  the  natural  man,  until  a 
Spiritual  Life  from  without  the  natural  life  seizes 
upon  him,  regenerates  him,  changes  him  into  a 
spiritual  man.  The  peril  of  the  illustration  from 
the  law  of  motion  will  not  be  felt  at  least  by  those 
who  appreciate  the  distinction  between  Physics  and 
biology,  between  Energy  and  Life.  The  change  of 
state  here  is  not  as  in  physics  a mere  change  of  direc- 
tion, the  affections  directed  to  a new  object,  the  will 
into  a new  channel.  The  change  involves  all  this, 
but  is  something  deeper.  It  is  a change  of  nature,  a 
regeneration,  a passing  from  death  into  life.  Hence 
relatively  to  this  higher  life  the  natural  life  is  no 
longer  Life,  but  Death,  and  the  natural  man  from 
the  standpoint  of  Christianity  is  dead.  Whatever 
assent  the  mind  may  give  to  this  proposition,  how- 
ever much  it  has  been  overlooked  in  the  past, 
however  it  compares  with  casual  observation,  it  is 
certain  that  the  Founder  of  the  Christian  religion 
intended  this  to  be  the  keystone  of  Christianity. 
In  the  proposition  That  which  is  Jlesh  is  fleshy  and 
that  which  is  spirit  is  spirit,  Chiist  formulates  the 
first  law  of  biological  religion,  and  lays  the  basis 
for  a final  classification.  He  divides  men  into  two 
classes,  the  living  and  the  not-living.  And  Paul 


$82 


CLASSIFICA  TION. 


afterwards  carries  out  the  classification  consistently, 
making  his  entire  system  depend  on  it,  and  through- 
out arranging  men,  on  the  one  hand  as  TryeviiarcKo^^ — - 
spiritual,  on  the  other  as  (j)vxf>fc6<; — carnal,  in  terms 
of  Christ’s  distinction. 

Suppose  now  it  be  granted  for  a moment  that  the 
character  of  the  not-a-Christian  is  as  beautiful  as 
that  of  the  Christian.  This  is  simply  to  say  that  the 
crystal  is  as  beautiful  as  the  organism.  One  is  quite 
entitled  to  hold  this  ; but  what  he  is  not  entitled  to 
hold  is  that  both  in  the  same  sense  are  living.  He 
that  hath  the  Son  hath  Life^  and  he  that  hath  7tot  the 
Son  of  God  hath  not  Life,  And  in  the  face  of  this 
law,  no  other  conclusion  is  possible  than  that  that 
which  is  flesh  remains  flesh.  No  matter  how  great 
the  development  of  beauty,  that  which  is  flesh  is 
withal  flesh.  The  elaborateness  or  the  perfection  of 
the  moral  development  in  any  given  instance  can  do 
nothing  to  break  down  this  distinction.  Man  is  a 
moral  animal,  and  can,  and  ought  to,  arrive  at  great 
natural  beauty  of  character.  But  this  is  simply  to 
obey  the  law  of  his  nature — the  law  of  his  flesh  ; 
and  no  progress  along  that  line  can  project  him  into 
the  spiritual  sphere.  If  any  one  choose  to  claim  that 
the  mineral  beauty,  the  fleshly  beauty,  the  natural 
moral  beauty,  is  all  he  covets,  he  is  entitled  to  his 
claim.  To  be  good  and  true,  pure  and  benevolent  in 


CLASSIFICA  TION. 


383 


the  moral  sphere,  are  high  and,  so  far,  legitimate 
objects  of  life.  If  he  deliberately  stop  here,  he  is  at 
liberty  to  do  so.  But  what  he  is  not  entitled  to  do  is 
to  call  himself  a Christian,  or  to  claim  to  discharge 
the  functions  peculiar  to  the  Christian  life.  His 
moiality  is  mere  crystallisation,  the  crystallising  forces 
having  had  fair  play  in  his  development.  But  these 
forces  have  no  more  touched  the  sphere  of  Christian- 
ity than  the  frost  on  the  window-pane  can  do  more 
than  simulate  the  external  forms  of  life.  And  if  he 
considers  that  the  high  development  to  which  he  has 
reached  may  pass  by  an  insensible  transition  into 
spirituality,  or  that  his  moral  nature  of  itself  may 
flash  into  the  flame  of  regenerate  Life,  he  has  to  be 
reminded  that  in  spite  of  the  apparent  connection 
of  these  things  from  one  standpoint,  from  another 
there  is  none  at  all,  or  none  discoverable  by  us.  On 
the  one  hand,  there  being  no  such  thing  as  Spontan- 
eous Generation,  his  moral  nature,  however  it  may 
encourage  it>  cannot  generate  Life ; while,  on  the 
other,  his  high  organization  can  never  in  itself  result 
in  Life,  Life  being  always  the  cause  of  organization 
and  never  the  effect  of  it. 

The  practical  question  may  now  be  asked,  is  this 
distinction  palpable  ? Is  it  a mere  conceit  of  Science, 
or  what  human  interests  attach  to  it  ? If  it  cannot 
be  proved  that  the  resulting  moral  or  spiritual 


384 


CLASSIFICA  TION. 


beauty  is  higher  in  the  one  case  than  in  the  other 
the  biological  distinction  is  useless.  And  if  the  ob- 
jcction  is  pressed  that  the  spiritual  man  has  nothing 
further  to  effect  in  the  direction  of  morality,  seeing 
that  the  natural  man  can  successfully  compete  with 
him,  the  questions  thus  raised  become  of  serious 
significance.  That  objection  would  certainly  be  fatal 
which  could  show  that  the  spiritual  world  was  not 
as  high  in  its  demand  for  a lofty  morality  as  the 
natural ; and  that  biology  would  be  equally  false  and 
dangerous  which  should  in  the  least  encourage  the 
view  that  ‘‘  without  holiness  a man  could  see  the 
Lord.'’  These  questions  accordingly  we  must  briefly 
consider.  It  is  necessary  to  premise,  however,  that 
the  difficulty  is  not  peculiar  to  the  present  position. 
This  is  simply  the  old  difficulty  of  distinguishing 
spirituality  and  morality. 

In  seeking  whatever  light  Science  may  have  to  offer 
as  to  the  difference  between  the  natural  and  the  spiri- 
tual man,  we  first  submit  the  question  to  Embryology. 
And  if  its  actual  contribution  is  small,  we  shall  at 
least  be  indebted  to  it  for  an  important  reason  why 
the  difficulty  should  exist  at  all.  That  there  is  grave 
difficulty  in  deciding  between  two  given  characters, 
the  one  natural,  the  other  spiritual,  is  conceded. 
But  if  we  can  find  a sufficient  justification  for  so 
perplexing  a circumstance,  the  fact  loses  weight  a3 


CLASSIFICA  TION. 


385 


an  objection,  and  the  whole  problem  is  placed  on  a 
different  footing. 

The  difference  on  tlie  score  of  beauty  between  the 
crystal  and  the  shell,  let  us  say  once  more,  is  im- 
perceptible. But  fix  attention  for  a moment,  not 
upon  their  appearance,  but  upon  their  possibilities, 
upon  their  relation  to  the  future,  and  upon  their 
place  in  evolution.  The  crystal  has  reached  its 
ultimate  stage  of  development.  It  can  never  be 
more  beautiful  than  it  is  now.  Take  it  to  pieces  and 
give  it  the  opportunity  to  beautify  itself  afresh,  and  it 
wall  just  do  the  same  thing  over  again.  It  will  form 
itself  into  a six-sided  pyramid,  and  go  on  repeating 
this  same  form  ad  infinitum  as  often  as  it  is  dis- 
solved, and  without  ever  improving  by  a hairsbreadth. . 
Its  law  of  crystallisation  allows  it  to  reach  this  limit, 
and  nothing  else  within  its  kingdom  can  do  any 
more  for  it.  In  dealing  with  the  crystal,  in  short, 
we  are  dealing  with  the  maximum  beauty  of  the 
inorganic  world.  But  in  dealing  with  the  shell,  we 
are  not  dealing  with  the  maximum  achievement  of 
the  organic  world.  In  itself  it  is  one  of  the  humblest 
forms  of  the  invertebrate  sub-kingdom  of  the  organic 
world  ; and  there  are  other  forms  within  this  king- 
dom so  different  from  the  shell  in  a hundred  respects 
that  to  mistake  them  would  simply  be  impossible. 

In  dealing  with  a man  of  fine  moral  character, 


c c 


386 


CLASSIFICA  TION. 


again,  we  are  dealing  with  the  highest  achievement 
of  the  organic  kingdom.  But  in  dealing  with  a 
spiritual  man  we  are  dealing  with  the  lozvest  form  oj 
life  in  the  spiritual  world.  To  contrast  the  two, 
therefore,  and  marvel  that  the  one  is  apparently  so 
little  better  than  the  other,  is  unscientific  and  unjust. 
The  spiritual  man  is  a mere  unformed  embryo, 
hidden  as  yet  in  his  earthly  chrysalis-case,  while  the 
natural  man  has  the  breeding  and  evolution  of  ages 
represented  in  his  character.  But  what  are  the 
possibilities  of  this  spiritual  organism  ? What  is  yet 
to  emerge  from  this  chrysalis-case.^  The  natural 
character  finds  its  limits  within  the  organic  sphere. 
But  who  is  to  define  the  limits  of  the  spiritual? 
Even  now  it  is  very  beautiful.  Even  as  an  embryo 
it  contains  some  prophecy  of  its  future  glory.  But 
the  point  to  mark  is,  that  it  doth  not  yet  appear  what 
it  shall  be. 

The  want  of  organization,  thus,  does  not  surprise 
us.  All  life  begins  at  the  Amoeboid  stage.  Evolution 
is  from  the  simple  to  the  complex  ; and  in  every  case 
It  is  some  time  before  organization  is  advanced 
enough  to  admit  of  exact  classification.  A natural- 
ist's only  serious  difficulty  in  classification  is  when 
he  comes  to  deal  with  low  or  embryonic  forms.  It 
is  impossible,  for  instance,  to  mistake  an  oak  for 
an  elephant ; but  at  the  bottom  of  the  vegetable 


CLASSIFICA  TION, 


38? 


series,  and  at  the  bottom  of  the  animal  series, 
there  are  organisms  of  so  doubtful  a character  that 
it  is  equally  impossible  to  distinguish  them.  So 
formidable,  indeed,  has  been  this  difficulty  that 
Haeckel  has  had  to  propose  an  intermediate  reg7ium 
protistic7mi  to  contain  those  forms  the  rudimentary 
character  of  which  makes  it  impossible  to  apply  the 
determining  tests. 

We  mention  this  merely  to  show  the  difficulty  of 
classification  and  not  for  analogy ; for  the  proper 
analogy  is  not  between  vegetal  and  animal  forms, 
whether  high  or  low,  but  between  the  living  and  the 
dead.  And  here  the  difficulty  is  certainly  not  so 
great.  By  suitable  tests  it  is  generally  possible  to 
distinguish  the  organic  from  the  inorganic.  The 
ordinary  eye  may  fail  to  detect  the  difference,  and 
innumerable  forms  are  assigned  by  the  popular  judg- 
ment to  the  inorganic  world  which  are  nevertheless 
undoubtedly  alive.  And  it  is  the  same  in  the  spirit- 
ual world.  To  a cursory  glance  these  rudimentary 
spiritual  forms  may  not  seem  to  exhibit  the  pheno- 
mena of  Life,  and  therefore  the  living  and  the  dead 
may  be  often  classed  as  one.  But  let  the  appropriate 
scientific  tests  be  applied.  In  the  almost  amorphous 
organism,  the  physiologist  ought  already  to  be  able 
to  detect  the  symptoms  of  a dawning  life.  And 
further  research  might  even  bring  to  light  some  faint 


388 


CLASSIFICA  TION 


indication  of  the  lines  along  which  the  future  de^ 
velopment  was  to  proceed.  Now  it  is  not  impossible 
that  among  the  tests  for  Life  there  may  be  some 
which  may  fitly  be  applied  to  the  spiritual  organism. 
We  may  therefore  at  this  point  hand  over  the  prob 
lem  to  Physiology. 

The  tests  for  Life  are  of  two  kinds.  It  is  remark- 
able that  one  of  them  was  proposed,  in  the  spiritual 
sphere,  by  Christ.  Foreseeing  the  difficulty  of 
determining  the  characters  and  functions  of  rudi- 
mentary organisms,  He  suggested  that  the  point  be 
decided  by  a further  evolution.  Time  for  develop- 
ment was  to  be  allowed,  during  wffiich  the  marks  .of 
Life,  if  any,  would  become  more  pronounced,  while 
in  the  meantime  judgment  was  to  be  suspended. 
*^Let  both  grow  together,''  He  said,  until  the 
harvest."  This  is  a thoroughly  scientific  test.  Ob- 
viously, however,  it  cannot  assist  us  for  the  present — 
except  in  the  way  of  enforcing  extreme  caution  in 
attempting  any  classification  at  all. 

The  second  test  is  at  least  not  so  manifestly  im- 
practicable: It  is  to  apply  the  ordinary  methods  by 

which  biology  attempts  to  distinguish  the  organic 
from  the  inorganic  The  characteristics  of  Life, 
according  to  Physiology,  are  four  in  number — 
Assimilation,  Waste,  Reproduction,  and  Spontaneous 
Action.  If  an  organism  is  found  to  exercise  these 


CLASSIFICATION. 


389 


functions,  it  is  said  to  be  alive.  Now  these  tests,  in 
a spiritual  sense,  might  fairly  be  applied  to  the 
spiritual  man.  The  experiment  would  be  a delicate 
one  It  might  not  be  open  to  every  one  to  attempt 
it.  This  is  a scientific  question  ; and  the  experiment 
would  have  to  be  conducted  under  proper  conditions 
and  by  competent  persons.  But  even  on  the  first 
statement  it  will  be  plain  to  all  who  are  familiar 
with  spiritual  diagnosis  that  the  experiment  could 
be  made,  and  especially  on  oneself,  with  some  hope 
of  success.  Biological  considerations,  however,  would 
warn  us  not  to  expect  too  much.  Whatever  be  the 
inadequacy  of  Morphology,  Physiology  can  never 
be  studied  apart  from  it ; and  the  investigation  of 
function  merely  as  function  is  a task  of  extreme 
difficulty.  Mr.  Herbert  Spencer  affirms,  “ We  have 
next  to  no  power  of  tracing  up  the  genesis  of  a 
function  considered  purely  as  a function — no  op- 
portunity of  observing  the  progressively-increasing 
quantities  of  a given  action  that  have  arisen  in  any 
order  of  organisms.  In  nearly  all  cases  we  are  able 
only  to  establish  the  greater  growth  of  the  part  which 
we  have  found  performs  the  action,  and  to  infer  that 
greater  action  of  the  part  has  accompanied  greater 
growth  of  Such  being  the  case,  it  would  serve 


* ^ Principles  of  Biology/^  voL  ii.  pp.  222,  223, 


390 


CLASSIFICA  TION, 


no  purpose  to  indicate  the  details  of  a barely  possible 
experiment.  We  are  merely  showing,  at  the  mo- 
ment, that  the  question  How  do  I know  that  I am 
alive”  is  not,  in  the  spiritual  sphere,  incapable  of 
solution.  One  might,  nevertheless,  single  out  some 
distinctively  spiritual  function  and  ask  himself  if  he 
consciously  discharged  it.  The  discharging  of  that 
function  is,  upon  biological  principles,  equivalent  to 
being  alive,  and  therefore  the  subject  of  the  experi- 
ment could  certainly  come  to  some  conclusion  as  to 
his  place  on  a biological  scale.  The  real  significance 
of  his  actions  on  the  moral  scale  might  be  less  easy 
to  determine,  but  he  could  at  least  tell  where  he 
stood  as  tested  by  the  standard  of  life — he  would 
know  whether  he  were  living  or  dead.  After  all,  the 
best  test  for  Life  is  just  living.  And  living  consists, 
as  we  have  formerly  seen,  in  corresponding  with 
Environment.  Those  therefore  who  find  within 
themselves,  and  regularly  exercise,  the  faculties  for 
corresponding  with  the  Divine  Environment,  may  be 
said  to  live  the  Spiritual  Life. 

That  this  Life  also,  even  in  the  embryonic  or- 
ganism, ought  already  to  betray  itself  to  others,  is 
certainly  what  one  would  expect.  Every  organism 
has  its  own  reaction  upon  Nature,  and  the  reaction 
of  the  spiritual  organism  upon  the  community  must 
be  looked  for.  In  the  absence  of  any  such  reaction 


CLASSIFICA  TION. 


39i 


in  the  absence  of  any  token  that  it  lived  for  a higher 
purpose,  or  that  its  real  interests  were  those  of  the 
Kingdom  to  which  it  professed  to  belong,  we  should 
be  entitled  to  question  its  being  in  that  Kingdom. 
It  is  obvious  that  each  Kingdom  has  its  own  ends 
and  interests,  its  own  functions  to  discharge  in 
Nature.  It  is  also  a law  that  every  organism  lives 
for  its  Kingdom.  And  man’s  place  in  Nature,  or 
his  position  among  the  Kingdoms,  is  to  be  decided 
by  the  characteristic  functions  habitually  discharged 
by  him  Now  when  the  habits  of  certain  individuals 
are  closely  observed,  when  the  total  effect  of  their 
life  and  work,  with  regard  to  the  community,  is 
gauged — as  carefully  observed  and  gauged  as  the 
influence  of  certain  individuals  in  a colony  of  ants 
might  be  observed  and  gauged  by  Sir  John  Lubbock 
— there  ought  to  be  no  difficulty  in  deciding  whether 
they  are  living  for  the  Organic  or  for  the  Spiritual  ; 
in  plainer  language,  for  the  world  or  for  God.  The 
question  of  Kingdoms,  at  least,  would  be  settled 
without  mistake.  The  place  of  any  given  individual 
in  his  own  Kingdom  is  a different  matter.  That  is 
a question  possibly  for  ethics.  But  from  the  bio- 
logical standpoint,  if  a man  is  living  for  the  world  it 
is  immaterial  how  well  he  lives  for  it.  He  ought  to 
live  well  for  it.  However  important  it  is  for  his  own 
Kingdom,  it  does  not  affect  his  biological  relation  to 


392 


CLASSIFJCA  TION, 


the  other  Kingdom  whether  his  character  is  perfect 
or  imperfect.  He  may  even  to  some  extent  as3ume 
the  outward  form  of  organisms  belonging  to  the  higher 
Kingdom ; but  so  long  as  his  reaction  upon  the 
world  is  the  reaction  of  his  species,  he  is  to  be  classed 
with  his  species,  so  long  as  the  bent  of  his  life  is  in 
the  direction  of  the  world,  he  remains  a worldling. 

Recent  botanical  and  entomological  researches 
have  made  Science  familiar  with  what  is  termed 
Mimicry,  Certain  organisms  in  one  Kingdom  as- 
sume, for  purposes  of  their  own,  the  outward  form 
of  organisms  belonging  to  another.  This  curious 
hypocrisy  is  practised  both  by  plants  and  animals, 
the  object  being  to  secure  some  personal  advantage, 
usually  safety,  which  would  be  denied  were  the 
organism  always  to  play  its  part  in  Nature  in  propria 
persona.  Thus  the  Ceroxylus  laceratus  of  Borneo 
has  assumed  so  perfectly  the  disguise  of  a moss- 
covered  branch  as  to  evade  the  attack  of  insecti- 
vorous birds  ; and  others  of  the  walking-stick  insects 
and  leaf-butterflies  practise  similar  deceptions  with 
great  effrontery  and  success.  It  is  a startling  result 
of  the  indirect  influence  of  Christianity,  or  of  a 
spurious  Christianity,  that  the  religious  world  has 
come  to  be  populated — how  largely  one  can  scarce 
venture  to  think — with  mimetic  species.  In  few 
cases,  probably,  is  this  a conscious  deception.  In 


Cl  4SSIFICA  Tion. 


393 


many  doubtless  it  is  induced,  as  in  Ceroxylus^  by 
the  desire  for  safety.  But  in  a majority  of  instances 
it  is  the  natural  effect  of  the  prestige  ol  a great 
system  upon  those  who,  coveting  its  benedictions, 
yet  fail  to  understand  its  true  nature,  or  decline 
to  bear  its  protounder  responsibilities.  It  is  here 
that  the  test  of  Life  becomes  of  supreme  import- 
ance. No  classification  on  the  ground  of  form  can 
exclude  mimetic  species,  or  discover  them  to  them- 
selves. But  if  man’s  place  among*  the  Kingdoms 
is  determined  by  his  functions,  a careful  estimate  of 
his  life  ;n  itself  and  in  its  reaction  upon  surrounding 
lives,  ought  at  once  to  betray  his  real  position.  No 
matter  what  may  be  the  moral  uprightness  of  his 
life,  the  honourableness  of  his  career,  or  the  ortho- 
doxy of  his  creed,  if  he  exercises  the  function  of 
loving  the  world,  that  defines  his  world — he  belongs 
to  the  Organic  Kingdom.  He  cannot  in  that  case 
belong  to  the  higher  Kingdom.  ‘‘  If  any  man  love 
the  world,  the  love  of  the  Father  is  not  in  him/’ 
After  all,  it  is  by  the  general  bent  of  a man’s  life, 
by  his  heart-impulses  and  secret  desires,  his  spon- 
taneous actions  and  abiding  motives,  that  his  gene* 
ration  is  declared. 

The  exclusiveness  of  Christianity,  separation  from 
the  world,  uncompromising  allegiance  to  the  King- 
dom of  God,  entire  surrender  of  body,  soul,  and 


394 


CLASSIFICA  TION. 


spirit  to  Christ — these  are  truths  which  rise  intc 
prominence  from  time  to  time,  become  the  watch- 
words of  insignificant  parties,  rouse  the  church  to 
attention  and  the  world  to  opposition,  and  die  down 
ultimately  for  want  of  lives  to  live  them.  The  few 
enthusiasts  who  distinguish  in  these  requirements 
the  essential  conditions  of  entrance  into  the  King- 
dom of  Christ  are  overpowered  by  the  weight  of 
numbers,  who  see  nothing  more  in  Christianity  than 
a mild  religiousness,  and  who  demand  nothing  more 
in  themselves  or  in  their  fellow- Christians  than  the 
participation  in  a conventional  worship,  thes  accept- 
ance of  traditional  beliefs,  and  the  living  of  an 
honest  life.  Yet  nothing  is  more  certain  than  that 
the  enthusiasts  are  right.  Any  impartial  survey — 
such  as  the  unique  analysis  in  "‘Ecce  Homo” — of  the 
claims  of  Christ  and  of  the  nature  of  His  society, 
will  convince  any  one  who  cares  to  make  the  inquiry 
of  the  outstanding  difference  between  the  system 
of  Christianity  in  the  original  contemplation  and  its 
representations  in  modern  life.  Christianity  marks 
the  advent  of  what  is  simply  a new  Kingdom.  Its 
distinctions  from  the  Kingdom  below  it  are  funda- 
mental. It  demands  from  its  members  activities 
and  responses  of  an  altogether  novel  order.  It  is, 
in  the  conception  of  its  Founder,  a Kingdom  for 
which  all  its  adherents  must  henceforth  exclusively 


CLASSIFICA  TION. 


39S 


live  and  work,  and  which  opens  its  gates  alone  upon 
those  who,  having  counted  the  cost,  are  prepared 
to  follow  it  if  need  be  to  the  death.  The  surrender 
Christ  demanded  was  absolute.  Every  aspirant  foi 
membership  must  seek  first  the  Kingdom  of  God 
And  in  order  to  enforce  the  demand  of  allegiance, 
or  rather  with  an  unconsciousness  which  contains  the 
finest  evidence  for  its  justice.  He  even  assumed  the 
title  of  King — a claim  which  in  other  circumstances, 
and  were  these  not  the  symbols  of  a higher  royalty 
seems  so  strangely  foreign  to  one  who  is  meek  and 
lowly  in  heart. 

But  this  imperious  claim  of  a Kingdom  upon  its 
members  is  not  peculiar  to  Christianity.  It  is  the 
law  in  all  departments  of  Nature  that  every 
organism  must  live  for  its  Kingdom.  And  in  de- 
fining living  for  the  higher  Kingdom  as  the  con- 
dition of  living  in  it,  Christ  enunciates  a principle 
which  all  Nature  has  prepared  us  to  expect.  Every 
province  has  its  peculiar  exactions,  every  Kingdom 
levies  upon  its  subjects  the  tax  of  an  exclusive 
obedience,  and  punishes  disloyalty  always  with 
death.  It  was  the  neglect  of  this  principle — that 
every  organism  must  live  for  its  Kingdom  if  it  is 
to  live  in  it~which  first  slowly  depopulated  the 
spiritual  world.  The  example  of  its  Founder  ceased 
to  find  imitators,  and  the  consecration  of  His  early 


596 


CLASSIFICA  TION. 


followers  came  to  be  regarded  as  a superfluous 
enthusiasm.  And  it  is  this  same  misconception  of 
the  fundamental  principle  of  all  Kingdoms  that  has 
deprived  modern  Christianity  of  its  vitality.  The 
failure  to  regard  the  exclusive  claims  of  Christ  as 
more  than  accidental,  rhetorical,  or  ideal ; the  failure 
to  discern  the  essential  difference  between  His  King- 
dom and  all  other  systems  based  on  the  lines  of 
natural  religion,  and  therefore  merely  Organic ; in 
a word,  the  general  neglect  of  the  claims  of  Christ 
as  the  Founder  of  a new  and  higher  Kingdom — 
these  have  taken  the  very  heart  from  the  religion 
of  Christ  and  left  its  evangel  without  power  to 
impress  or  bless  the  world.  Until  even  religious 
men  see  the  uniqueness  of  Christ's  society,  until 
they  acknowledge  to  the  full  extent  its  claim  to  be 
nothing  less  than  a nev/  Kingdom,  they  will  continue 
the  hopeless  attempt  to  live  for  two  Kingdoms  at 
once.  And  hence  the  value  of  a more  explicit 
Classification.  For  probably  the  most  of  the  diffi- 
culties of  trjdng  to  live  the  Christian  life  arise  from 
attempting  to  half-live  it. 

As  a merely  verbal  matter,  this  identification  ol 
the  Spiritual  World  with  what  are  known  to  Science 
as  Kingdoms,  necessitates  an  explanation.  The 
suggested  relation  of  the  Kingdom  of  Christ  to  the 
Mineral  and  Animal  Kingdoms  does  not,  of  course, 


CLASSIFICA  TION. 


397 


depend  upon  the  accident  that  the  Spiritual  World 
is  named  in  the  sacred  writings  by  the  same  word. 
This  certainly  lends  an  appearance  of  fancy  to  the 
generalisation : and  one  feels  tempted  at  first  to 
dismiss  it  with  a smile.  But,  in  truth,  it  is  no 
mere  play  on  the  word  Kingdom,  Science  de- 
mands the  classification  of  every  organism.  And 
here  is  an  organism  of  a unique  kind,  a living 
energetic  spirit,  a new  creature  which,  by  an  act 
of  generation,  has  been  begotten  of  God.  Starting 
from  the  point  that  the  spiritual  life  is  to  be  studied 
biologically,  we  must  at  once  proceed,  as  the  first 
step  in  the  scientific  examination  of  this  organism, 
to  enter  it  in  its  appropriate  class.  Now  two  King- 
doms, at  the  present  time,  are  known  to  Science — 
the  Inorganic  and  the  Organic.  It  does  not  belong 
to  the  Inorganic  Kingdom,  because  it  lives.  It  does 
not  belong  to  the  Organic  Kingdom,  because  it  is 
endowed  with  a kind  of  Life  infinitely  removed  from 
either  the  vegetal  or  animal.  Where  then  shall  it 
be  classed } We  are  left  without  an  alternative. 
There  being  no  Kingdom  known  to  Science  which 
can  contain  it,  we  must  construct  one.  Or  rather 
we  must  include  in  the  programme  of  Science  a 
Kingdom  already  constructed  but  the  place  of  which 
in  science  has  not  yet  been  recognised.  That  King-^ 
dom  is  the  Kingdom  of  God 


>9» 


CLASSIFICA  TION, 


Taking  now  this  larger  view  of  the  content  of 
science,  we  may  leave  the  case  of  the  individnsJ 
and  pass  on  to  outline  the  scheme  of  Nature  as  a 
whole.  The  general  conception  will  be  as  follows  : — 
First,  we  find  at  the  bottom  of  everything  the 
Mineral  or  Inorganic  Kingdom.  Its  characteristics 
are,  first,  that  so  far  as  the  sphere  above  it  is  con- 
cerned it  is  dead ; second,  that  although  dead  it 
furnishes  the  physical  basis  of  life  to  the  Kingdom 
next  in  order.  It  is  thus  absolutely  essential  to 
the  Kingdom  above  it.  And  the  more  minutely 
the  detailed  structure  and  ordering  of  the  whole 
fabric  are  investigated  it  becomes  increasingly  ap- 
parent that  the  Inorganic  Kingdom  is  the  pre- 
paration for,  and  the  prophecy  of,  the  Organic. 

Second,  we  come  to  the  world  next  in  order,  the 
world  containing  plant,  and  animal,  and  man,  the 
Organic  Kingdom.  Its  characteristics  are,  first,  that 
so  far  as  the  sphere  above  it  is  concerned  it  is  dead  ; 
and,  second,  although  dead  it  supplies  in  turn  the 
basis  of  life  to  the  Kingdom  next  in  order.  And 
the  more  minutely  the  detailed  structure  and  order- 
ing of  the  whole  fabric  are  investigated,  it  is  obvious, 
m turn,  that  the  Organic  Kingdom  is  the  preparation 
for,  and  the  prophecy  of,  the  Spiritual 

Third,  and  highest,  we  reach  the  Spiritual  King^ 
dom,  or  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven.  What  its  chaino 


CLASSIFICA  TION. 


399 


teristics  are,  relatively  to  any  hypothetical  higher 
Kingdom,  necessarily  remain  unknown.  That  the 
Spiritual,  in  turn,  may  be  the  preparation  for,  and 
the  prophecy  of,  something  still  higher  is  not  im- 
possible. But  the  very  conception  of  a Fourth 
Kingdom  transcends  us,  and  if  it  exist,  the  Spiritual 
organism,  by  the  analogy,  must  remain  at  present 
wholly  dead  to  it. 

The  warrant  for  adding  this  Third  Kingdom  con- 
sists, as  just  stated,  in  the  fact  that  there  are 
organisms  w^hich  from  their  peculiar  origin,  nature, 
and  destiny  cannot  be  fitly  entered  in  either  of  the 
two  Kingdoms  now  known  to  science.  The  Second 
Kingdom  is  proclaimed  by  the  advent  upon  the 
stage  of  the  First,  of  once-born  organisms.  The 
Third  is  ushered  in  by  the  appearance,  among  these 
once-born  organisms,  of  forms  of  life  which  have 
been  born  again — twice-born  organisms.  The  classi- 
fication, therefore,  is  based,  from  the  scientific  side 
on  certain  facts  of  embryology  and  on  the  Law  of 
Biogenesis  ; and  from  the  theological  side  on  cer- 
tain facts  of  experience  and  on  the  doctrine  of  Re« 
generation.  To  those  who  hold  either  to  Biogenesis 
or  to  Regeneration,  there  is  no  escape  from  a Third 
Kingdom.^ 

‘ Philosophical  classifications  in  this  direction  (see  for  instanoj 
Godef  s Old  Testament  Studies,”  pp.  2-40),  owing  to  their  neglect 


400 


CLASSIflCA  TION. 


There  is»  in  this  conception  of  a high  and  spiritual 
organism  rising  out  of  the  highest  point  of  the 
Organic  Kingdom,  in  the  hypothesis  of  the  Spiritual 
Kingdom  itself,  a Third  Kingdom  following  the 
Second  in  sequence  as  orderly  as  the  Second  follows 
the  First,  a Kingdom  utilising  the  materials  of  both 
the  Kingdoms  beneath  it,  continuing  their  laws,  and, 
above  all,  accounting  for  these  lower  Kingdoms  in  a 
legitimate  way  and  complementing  them  in  the  only 
known  way — there  is  in  all  this  a suggestion  of  the 
greatest  of  modern  scientific  doctrines,  the  Evolution 
hypothesis,  too  impressive  to  pass  unnoticed.  The 
strength  of  the  doctrine  of  Evolution,  at  least  in  its 
broader  outlines,  is  now  such  that  its  verdict  on  any 
biological  question  is  a consideration  of  moment. 
And  if  any  further  defence  is  needed  for  the  idea  of 


of  the  facts  of  Biogenesis  can  never  satisfy  the  biologist — any 
more  than  the  above  will  wholly  satisfy  the  philosopher.  Both 
are  needed.  Rothe,  in  his  “Aphorisms,  strikingly  notes  one 
point : “ Es  ist  beachtenswerth,  wie  in  der  Schopfung  immer 
aus  der  Auflosung  der  nachst  niederen  Stufe  die  nachst  hohere 
hervorgeht,  so  dass  jene  immer  das  Substrat  zur  Erzeugung 
dieser  Kraft  der  schopferischen  Einwirkung  bildet.  (Wie  es 
denn  nicht  anders  sein  kann  bei  einer  Entwicklung  der  Kreatur 
ans  sich  selbst.)  Aus  den  zersetzten  Elementen  erheben  sich 
das  Mineral,  aus  dem  verwitterten  Material  die  Pflanze,  aus  dei 
vep/vesten  Pflanze  das  Thier.  So  erhebt  sich  auch  aus  dem  in 
die  Elemente  zuriicksinkenden  Materiellen  Menschen  der  Gcist, 
das  geistige  Geschopf,” — “ Stille  Stunden,”  p,  64. 


CLASSIFICA  TION, 


401 


a Third  Kingdom  it  may  be  found  in  the  singular 
harmony  of  the  whole  conception  with  this  great 
modern  truth.  It  might  even  be  asked  whether  a 
complete  and  consistent  theory  of  Evolution  does 
not  really  demand  such  a conception  } Why  should 
Evolution  stop  with  the  Organic  ? It  is  surely 
obvious  that  the  complement  of  Evolution  is  Advo- 
iution,  and  the  inquiry,  Whence  has  all  this  system 
of  things  come,  is,  after  all,  of  minor  importance 
compared  with  the  question.  Whither  does  all  this 
tend  ? Science,  as  such,  may  have  little  to  say  on 
such  a question.  And  it  is  perhaps  impossible,  with 
such  faculties  as  we  now  possess,  to  imagine  an 
Evolution  with  a future  as  great  as  its  past.  So 
stupendous  is  the  development  from  the  atom  to  the 
man  that  no  point  can  be  fixed  in  the  future  as 
distant  from  what  man  is  now  as  he  is  from  the 
atom.  But  it  has  been  given  to  Christianity  to 
disclose  the  lines  of  a further  Evolution.  And  if 
Science  also  professes  to  offer  a further  Evolution, 
not  the  most  sanguine  evolutionist  will  venture  to 
contrast  it,  either  as  regards  the  dignity  of  its 
methods,  the  magnificence  of  its  aims,  or  the  cer- 
tainty of  its  hopes,  with  the  prospects  of  the  Spiritual 
Kingdom.  That  Science  has  a prospect  of  some  sort 
to  hold  out  to  man,  is  not  denied.  But  its  limits  are 
already  marked.  Mr,  Herbert  Spencer,  after  in^ 


D D 


402 


CLASSIFICA  TION. 


vestigating  its  possibilities  fully,  tells  us,  Evolution 
has  an  impassable  limit.”  ^ It  is  the  distinct  claim 
of  the  Third  Kingdom  that  this  limit  is  not  final 
Christianity  opens  a way  to  a further  development 
— a development  apart  from  which  the  magnificent 
past  of  Nature  has  been  in  vain,  and  without  which 
Organic  Evolution,  in  spite  of  the  elaborateness  of 
its  processes  and  the  vastness  of  its  achievements, 
is  simply  a stupendous  cul  de  sac.  Far  as  Nature 
carries  on  the  task,  vast  as  is  the  distance  between 
the  atom  and  the  man,  she  has  to  lay  down  her  tools 
when  the  work  is  just  begun.  Man,  her  most  rich 
and  finished  product,  marvellous  in  his  complexity, 
all  but  Divine  in  sensibility,  is  to  the  Third  Kingdom 
not  even  a shapeless  embryo.  The  old  chain  of  pro- 
cesses must  begin  again  on  the  higher  plane  if  there 
is  to  be  a further  Evolution.  The  highest  organism 
of  the  Second  Kingdom — simple,  immobile,  dead  as 
the  inorganic  crystal,  towards  the  sphere  above — 
must  be  vitalized  afresh.  Then  from  a mass  of  all 
but  homogeneous  ‘‘  protoplasm  ” the  organism  must 
pass  through  all  the  stages  of  differentiation  and  in- 
tegration, growing  in  perfectness  and  beauty  under 
the  unfolding  of  the  higher  Evolution,  until  it  reaches 
the  Infinite  Complexity,  the  Infinite  Sensibility,  God 


I First  Principles/’  p.  440, 


CLASSIFY  CA  TION. 


403 


So  the  spiritual  carries  on  the  marvellous  process  to 
which  all  lower  Nature  ministers,  and  perfects  it 
when  the  ministry  of  lower  Nature  fails. 

This  conception  of  a further  Evolution  carries  with 
it  the  final  answer  to  the  charge  that,  as  regards 
morality,  the  Spiritual  world  has  nothing  to  offer 
man  that  is  not  already  within  his  reach.  Will  it  be 
contended  that  a perfect  morality  is  already  within 
the  reach  of  the  natural  man  } What  product  of  the 
organic  creation  has  ever  attained  to  the  fulness  o^. 
the  stature  of  Him  who  is  the  Founder  and  Type 
of  the  Spiritual  Kingdom  f What  do  men  know  of 
the  qualities  enjoined  in  His  Beatitudes,  or  at  what 
value  do  they  even  estimate  them } Proved  by 
results,  it  is  surely  already  decided  that  on  merely 
natural  lines  moral  perfection  is  unattainable.  And 
even  Science  is  beginning  to  waken  to  the  mo- 
mentous truth  that  Man,  the  highest  product  of  the 
Organic  Kingdom,  is  a disappointment.  But  even 
were  it  otherwise,  if  even  in  prospect  the  hopes  of 
the  Organic  Kingdom  could  be  justified,  its  standard 
of  beauty  is  not  so  high,  nor,  in  spite  of  the  dreams 
of  Evolution,  is  its  guarantee  so  certain.  The  goal 
of  the  organisms  of  the  Spiritual  World  is  nothing 
less  than  this — to  be  ‘^holy  as  He  is  holy,  and  pure 
as  He  is  pure.”  And  by  the  Law  of  Conformity  to 
Type,  their  final  perfection  is  secured.  The  inward 


CLASSTFJCA  TION. 


404 

nature  must  develop  out  according  to  its  Type,  until 
the  consummation  of  oneness  with  God  is  reached. 

These  proposals  of  the  Spiritual  Kingdom  in  the 
direction  of  Evolution  are  at  least  entitled,  to  be 
carefully  considered  by  Science.  Christianity  defines 
the  highest  conceivable  future  for  mankind.  It 
satisfies  the  Law  of  Continuity.  It  guarantees  the 
necessary  conditions  for  carrying  on  the  organism 
successfully,  from  stage  to  stage.  It  provides  against 
the  tendency  to  Degeneration.  And  finally,  instead 
of  limiting  the  yearning  hope  of  final  perfection  to 
the  organisms  of  a future  age, — an  age  so  remote  that 
the  hope  for  thousands  of  years  must  still  be  hope- 
less,— instead  of  inflicting  this  cruelty  on  intelligences 
mature  enough  to  know  perfection  and  earnest 
enough  to  wish  it,  Christianity  puts  the  prize  within 
immediate  reach  of  man. 

This  attempt  to  incorporate  the  Spiritual  Kingdom 
in  the  scheme  of  Evolution,  may  be  met  by  what 
seems  at  first  sight  a fatal  objection.  So  far  from 
the  idea  of  a Spiritual  Kingdom  being  in  harmony 
with  the  doctrine  of  Evolution,  it  may  be  said  that 
it  is  violently  opposed  to  it  It  announces  a new 
Kingdom  starting  off  suddenly  on  a different  plane 
and  in  direct  violation  of  the  primary  principle  of 
development.  Instead  of  carrying  the  organic  evo- 
lution further  on  its  own  lines,  theology  at  a given 


Cl  ASSIFICA  TION. 


405 

point  interposes  a sudden  and  hopeless  barrier — the 
barrier  between  the  natural  and  the  spiritual — and 
insists  that  the  evolutionary  process  must  begin 
again  at  the  beginning.  At  this  point,  in  fact, 
Nature  acts  per  saltum.  This  is  no  Evolution,  but 
a Catastrophe — such  a Catastrophe  as  must  be  fatal 
to 'any  consistent  development  hypothesis. 

On  the  surface  this  objection  seems  final — but  it 
is  only  on  the  surface.  It  arises  from  taking  a too 
narrow  view  of  what  Evolution  is.  It  takes  evolution 
in  zoology  for  Evolution  as  a whole.  Evolution 
began,  let  U3  say,  with  some  primeval  nebulous  mass 
in  which  lay  potentially  all  future*  worlds.  Under 
the  evolutionary  hand,  the  amorphous  cloud  broke 
up,  condensed,  took  definite  shape,  and  in  the  line 
of  true  development  assumed  a gradually  increasing 
complexity.  Finally  there  emerged  the  cooled  and 
finished  earth,  highly  differentiated,  so  to  speak, 
complete  and  fully  equipped.  And  what  followed  ? 
Let  it  be  well  observed — a Catastrophe.  Instead  of 
carrying  the  process  further,  the  Evolution,  if  this  is 
Evolution,  here  also  abruptly  stops.  A sudden  and 
hopeless  barrier — the  barrier  between  the  Inorganic 
and  the  Organic — interposes,  and  the  process  has  to 
begin  again  at  the  beginning  with  the  creation  of 
Life.  Here  then  is  a barrier  placed  by  Science  at 
the  close  of  the  Inorganic  similar  to  the  barrier 


CLASSIFICA  riON. 


40^ 

placed  by  Theology  at  the  close  of  the  Organic 
Science  has  used  every  effort  to  abolish  this  first 
barrier,  but  there  it  still  stands  challenging  the 
attention  of  the  modern  world,  and  no  consistent 
theory  of  Evolution  can  fail  to  reckon  with  it  Any 
objection,  then,  to  the  Catastrophe  introduced  by 
Christianity  between  the  Natural  and  Spiritual 
Kingdoms  applies  with  equal  force  against  the 
barrier  which  Science  places  between  the  Inorganic 
and  the  Organic.  The  reserve  of  Life  in  either  case 
is  a fact,  and  a fact  of  exceptional  significance. 

What  then  becomes  of  Evolution } Do  these  two 
great  barriers  destroy  it } By  no  means.  But  they 
make  it  necessary  to  frame  a larger  doctrine.  And 
the  doctrine  gains  immeasurably  by  such  an  enlarge- 
ment. For  now  the  case  stands  thus  : Evolution,  in 
harmony  with  its  own  law  that  progress  is  from  the 
simple  to  the  complex,  begins  itself  to  pass  towards 
the  complex.  The  materialistic  Evolution,  so  to 
speak,  is  a straight  line.  Making  all  else  complex, 
it  alone  remains  simple — unscientifically  simple. 
But  as  Evolution  unfolds  everything  else,  it  is  now 
seen  to  be  itself  slowly  unfolding.  The  straight  line 
is  coming  out  gradually  in  curves.  At  a given  point 
a new  force  appears  deflecting  it ; and  at  another 
given  point  a new  force  appears  deflecting  that. 
These  points  are  not  unrelated  points ; these  forces' 


CLA  SSIFICA  TION. 


407 


are  not  unrelated  forces.  The  arrangement  is  still 
harmonious,  and  the  development  throughout  obeys 
the  evolutionary  law  in  being  from  the  general  to  the 
special,  from  the  lower  to  the  higher.  What  we  are 
reaching,  in  short,  is  nothing  less  than  the  evolution 
of  Evolution, 

Now  to  both  Science  and  Christianity,  and  espe- 
cially to  Science,  this  enrichment  of  Evolution  is 
important.  And,  on  the  part  of  Christianity,  the 
contribution  to  the  system  of  Nature  of  a second 
barrier  is  of  real  scientific  value.  At  first  it  may 
seem  merely  to  increase  the  difficulty.  But  in  reality 
it  abolishes  it.  However  paradoxical  it  seems,  it  is 
nevertheless  the  case  that  two  barriers  are  more  easy 
to  understand  than  one, — two  mysteries  are  less 
mysterious  than  a single  mystery.  For  it  requires 
two  to  constitute  a harmony.  One  by  itself  is  a 
Catastrophe.  But,  just  as  the  recurrence  of  an 
eclipse  at  different  periods  m'akes  an  eclipse  no 
breach  of  Continuity  ; just  as  the  fact  that  the  astro- 
nomical conditions  necessary  to  cause  a Glacial 
Period  will  in  the  remote  future  again  be  fulfilled 
constitutes  the  Great  Ice  Age  a normal  phenomenon ; 
so  the  recurrence  of  two  periods  associated  with 
special  phenomena  of  Life,  the  second  higher,  and 
by  the  'aw  necessarily  higher,  is  no  violation  of  the 
principle  of  Evolution.  Thus  even  in  the  matter  ol 


CLASSIFICA  TION, 


adding  a second  to  the  one  barrier  of  Nature,  the 
Third  Kingdom  may  already  claim  to  complement 
the  Science  of  the  Second.  The  overthrow  of  Spon- 
taneous Generation  has  left  a break  in  Continuity 
which  continues  to  put  Science  to  confusion.  Alone, 
it  is  as  abnormal  and  perplexing  to  the  intellect  as 
the  first  eclipse.  But  if  the  Spiritual  Kingdom  can 
supply  Science  with  a companion-phenomenon,  the 
most  exceptional  thing  in  the  scientific  sphere  falls 
within  the  domain  of  Law.  This,  however,  is  no 
more  than  might  be  expected  from  a Third  King- 
dom. True  to  its  place  as  the  highest  of  the  King- 
doms, it  ought  to  embrace  all  that  lies  beneath  and 
give  to  the  First  and  Second  their  final  explanation. 

How  much  more  in  the  under-Kingdoms  might  be 
explained  or  illuminated  upon  this  principle,  how- 
ever tempting  might  be  the  inquiry,  we  cannot  turn 
aside  to  ask.  But  the  rank  of  the  Third  Kingdom 
in  the  order  of  Evolution  implies  that  it  holds  the 
key  to  much  that  is  obscure  in  the  world  around — 
much  that,  apart  from  it,  must  always  remain  obscure. 
A single  obvious  instance  will  serve  to  illustrate  .he 
fertility  of  the  method.  What  has  this  Kingdom  to 
contribute  to  Science  with  regard  to  the  problem  of 
the  origin  of  Life  itself.?^  Taking  this  as  an  isolated 
phenomenon,  neither  the  Second  Kingdom,  nor 
the  Third,  apart  from  revelation,  has  anything  to 


CLASSIFICA  TION. 


409 


pronounce.  But  when  we  observe  the  companion- 
phenomenon  in  the  higher  Kingdom,  the  question 
Is  simplified.  It  will  be  disputed  by  none  that  the 
source  of  Life  in  the  Spiritual  World  is  God.  And 
as  the  same  Law  of  Biogenesis  prevails  in  both 
spheres,  we  may  reason  from  the  higher  to  the  low'^ei 
and  afifirm  it  to  be  at  least  likely  that  the  origin  of 
life  there  has  been  the  same. 

There  remains  yet  one  other  objection  of  a some- 
what differen':  order,  and  which  is  only  referred  to 
because  it  is  certain  to  be  raised  by  those  who  fail  to 
appreciate  the  distinctions  of  Biology.  Those  whose 
sympathies  are  rather  with  Philosophy  than  with 
Science  may  incline  to  dispute  the  allocation  of  so 
high  an  organism  as  man  to  the  merely  vegetal  and 
animal  Kingdom.  Recognising  the  immense  moral 
and  intellectual  distinctions  between  him  and  even 
the  highest  animal,  they  would  introduce  a third 
barrier  between  man  and  animal — a barrier  even 
greater  than  that  between  the  Inorganic  and  the 
Organic  Now,  no  science  can  be  blind  to  these 
distinctions.  The  only  question  is  whether  they  are 
of  such  a kind  as  to  make  it  necessary  to  classify 
man  in  a separate  Kingdom.  And  to  this  the  answ^er 
of  Science  is  in  the  negative.  Modern  Science 
knows  only  two  Kingdoms — the  Inorganic  and  the 
Organic  A barrier  between  man  and  animal  there 


CLASSIFICA  TION. 


ISO 

may  be,  but  it  is  a different  barrier  from  that  which 
separates  Inorganic  from  Organic.  But  even  wfres 
this  to  be  denied,  and  in  spite  of  all  science  it  will  be 
denied,  it  would  make  no  difference  as  legards  the 
general  question.  It  would  merely  interpose  anothei 
Kingdom  between  the  Organic  and  the  Spiritual,  the 
other  relations  remaining  as  before.  Any  one,  there^ 
fore,  with  a theory  to  support  as  to  the  exceptional 
creation  of  the  Human  Race  will  find  the  present 
classification  elastic  enough  for  his  purpose.  Philo- 
sophy, of  course,  may  propose  another  arrangement 
of  the  Kingdoms  if  it  chooses.  It  is  only  contended 
that  this  is  the  order  demanded  by  Biology.  To  add 
another  Kingdom  mid-way  between  the  Organic  and 
the  Spiritual,  could  that  be  justified  at  any  future 
time  on  scientific  grounds,  would  be  a mere  question 
of  further  detail. 

Studies  in  Classification,  beginning  with  consider- 
ations of  quality,  usually  end  with  a reference  to 
quantity.  And  though  one  would  willingly  terminate 
the  inquiry  on  the  threshold  of  such  a subject,  the 
example  of  Revelation  not  less  than  the  analogies  of 
Nature  press  for  at  least  a general  statement. 

The  broad  impression  gathered  from  the  utterances 
ot  the  Founder  of  the  Spiritual  Kingdom  is  that  the 
number  of  organisms  to  be  included  in  it  is  to  be 
comparatively  small  The  outstanding  characteristic 


CLASSIFICA  TION. 


411 


of  the  new  Society  is  to  be  its  selectness.  “ Many 
are  called,”  said  Christ,  ‘‘  but  few  are  chosen.'’  And 
when  one  recalls,  on  the  one  hand,  the  conditions  ol 
membership,  and,  on  the  other,  observes  the  lives  and 
aspirations  of  average  men,  the  force  of  the  verdict 
becomes  apparent.  In  its  bearing  upon  the  general 
question,  such  a conclusion  is  not  without  suggestive- 
ness. Here  again  is  another  evidence  of  the  radical 
nature  of  Christianity.  That  “ few  are  chosen  ” indi- 
cates a deeper  view  of  the  relation  of  Christ’s  King- 
dom to  the  world,  and  stricter  qualifications  of 
membership,  than  lie  on  the  surface  or  are  allowed 
for  in  the  ordinary  practice  of  religion. 

The  analogy  of  Nature  upon  this  point  is  not  less 
striking — it  may  be  added,  not  less  solemn.  It  is  an 
open  secret,  to  be  read  in  a hundred  analogies  from 
the  world  around,  that  of  the  millions  of  possible  en- 
trants for  advancement  in  any  department  of  Nature 
the  number  ultimately  selected  for  preferment  is  small. 
Here  also  ‘‘many  are  called  and  few  are  chosen.’* 
The  analogies  from  the  waste  of  seed,  of  pollen,  of 
human  lives,  are  too  familiar  to  be  quoted.  In  certain 
details,  possibly,  these  comparisons  are  inappropriate. 
But  there  are  other  analogies,  wider  and  more  just, 
which  strike  deeper  into  the  system  of  Nature.  A 
comprehensive  view  of  the  whole  field  of  Nature 
discloses  the  fact  that  the  circle  of  the  chosen  slowly 


412 


CLASSIFICA  TION. 


contracts  as  we  rise  in  the  scale  of  being.  Some 
mineral,  but  not  all,  becomes  vegetable  ; some  vege*^ 
table,  but  not  all,  becomes  animal  ; some  animal^ 
but  not  all,  becomes  human  ; some  human,  but  not 
all,  becomes  Divine.  Thus  the  area  narrows.  At 
the  base  is  the  mineral,  most  broad  and  simple ; the 
spiritual  at  the  apex,  smallest,  but  most  highly  differ- 
entiated. So  form  rises  above  form.  Kingdom  above 
Kingdom.  Quantity  decreases  as  qitality  increases. 

The  gravitation  of  the  whole  system  of  Nature 
towards  quality  is  surely  a phenomenon  of  com- 
manding interest.  And  if  among  the  more  recent 
revelations  of  Nature  there  is  one  thing  more  signifi- 
cant for  Religion  than  another,  it  is  the  majestic 
spectacle  of  the  rise  of  Kingdoms  towards  scarcer 
yet  nobler  forms,  and  simpler  yet  diviner  ends.  Of 
the  early  stage,  the  first  development  of  the  earth 
from  the  nebulous  matrix  of  space,  Science  speaks 
with  reserve.  The  second,  the  evolution  of  each 
individual  from  the  simple  protoplasmic  cell  to  the 
formed  adult,  is  proved.  The  still  wider  evolution, 
not  of  solitary  individuals,  but  of  all  the  individuals 
within  each  province— in  the  vegetal  world  from  the 
unicellular  cryptogam  to  the  highest  phanerogam,  in 
the  animal  world  from  the  amorphous  amoeba  to 
jVian — ^^is  at  least  suspected,  the  gradual  rise  of  types 
being  at  all  events  a fact.  But  now,  at  last,  we 


CLASSIFICA  TION. 


413 


see  the  Kingdoms  themselves  evolving.  And  that 
supreme  law  which  has  guided  the  development  from 
simple  to  complex  in  matter,  in  individual,  in  sub- 
Kingdom,  and  in  Kingdom,  until  only  two  or  three 
great  Kingdoms  remain,  now  begins  at  the  begin- 
ning again,  directing  the  evolution  of  these  million- 
peopled  worlds  as  if  they  were  simple  cells  or 
organisms.  Thus,  what  applies  to  the  individual 
applies  to  the  family,  what  applies  to  the  family 
applies  to  the  Kingdom,  what  applies  to  the  Kii3g- 
dom  applies  to  the  Kingdoms.  And  so,  out  of  the 
infinite  complexity  there  rises  an  infinite  simplicity, 
the  foreshadowing  of  a final  unity,  of  that 

**  One  God,  one  law,  one  element, 

And  one  far-off  divine  event. 

To  which  the  whole  creation  moves.^^  * 

This  is  the  final  triumph  of  Continuity,  the  heart' 
secret  of  Creation,  the  unspoken  prophecy  of  Christi- 
anity. To  Science,  defining  it  as  a working  principle, 
this  mighty  process  of  amelioration  is  simply  Evolu* 
tion.  To  Christianity,  discerning  the  end  through 
the  means,  it  is  Redemption,  These  silent  and 
patient  processes,  elaborating,  eliminating,  develop- 
ing all  from  the  first  of  time,  conducting  the  evolu- 
tion from  millennium  to  millennium  with  unaltering 


^ Memoriam 


CLASSIFICA  TION. 


4U 

purpose  and  unfaltering  power,  are  the  early  stages 
in  the  redemptive  work — the  unseen  approach  of  that 
Kingdom  whose  strange  mark  is  that  it  ^‘cometh 
without  obsc/vation.”  And  these  Kingdoms  rising 
tier  above  tier  in  ever  increasing  sublimity  and 
beauty,  their  foundations  visibly  fixed  in  the  past, 
their  progress,  and  the  direction  of  their  progress, 
being  facts  in  Nature  still,  are  the  signs  which,  since 
the  Magi  saw  His  star  in  the  East,  have  never  been 
wanting  from  the  firmament  of  truth,  and  which  in 
every  age  with  growing  clearness  to  the  wise,  and 
with  ever-gathering  mystery  to  the  uninitiated,  pro< 
claim  that  ‘‘the  Kingdom  of  God  is  at  hand” 


Finis. 


